Skip to main content

Full text of "The angel-messiah of Buddhists, Essenes, and Christians"

See other formats




BL 475 .B86 1880 
Bunsen, Ernst von, 1819- 

The angel-messiah of 

Rnridhists. Rssptips. anfi 
















.1// righ It ' ■ er\ 


The conception of an incarnate Angel as Messiah is 
of Eastern origin, and there is no trace of it in those 
portions of the Hebrew Scriptures which possibly were 
written before the Captivity, nor in the first three 
Gospels. 'The Angel-Messiah' or Melech-Hamoshiach 
is a compound title which constantly occurs in the 
Commentaries or Midrashim, the records of Scribal tra- 
dition, also in the Targums. Although this Messianic 
name is not to be found in the Talmud, the latter 
designates as the Messiah the Angel of God who followed 
the Israelites in the wilderness, and who is here called 
the Angel Metatron, or He who stands by the throne 
(pp. 91, 92, 101, 303). That Angel Paul calls Christ. 

It can be shown that this new Messianic conception 
was introduced into Judaism and into Christianity by the 
Essenes or Essai, to whom John the Baptist or Ashai, 
the bather, probably belonged, and who are in the 
New Testament designated as disciples of John. Jesus 
opposed the principal doctrines of John, whom he 
designated as not belonging to his kingdom of heaven, or 
of the Spirit, which he declared as having already come ; 
whilst the disciples of John had not even heard 'whether 
there be any Holy Ghost.' The disciples of John the 
Baptist or Essene must have expected that the Spirit of 
God would be brought from heaven to earth by Him 
who should baptize with the Holy Ghost. The Law 


and the Prophets until John had only prophesied about 
the future coming of the Spirit of God or the kingdom 
of heaven, but since the days of John those who entered 
it did so by force, because it suffered violence, or was 
violently closed by the Scribes and Pharisees, who ' shut 
up the kingdom of heaven against men.' Jesus did not 
sanction, but seems to have even opposed, the doctrine 
of the Angel-Messiah as promulgated by the Essenes or 
disciples of John. 

Nothing is transmitted to us about the Messianic 
expectations of the Essenes, and this mysterious fact is 
I >est explained by the supposition that their secret tradi- 
tion referred to an incarnate Angel as the Messiah. This 
supposition is confirmed by the presumable Messianic 
expectations of John the Baptist or Essene. As such he 
could not reveal them, if < He that should come,' the 
Tathagata of Buddhists (p. 342), was to be an incarnate 
Angel ; for the Essenes were bound by oath not to 
divulge their doctrines about angels. At the end of 
the Apostolic age the Essenes can be proved to have 
believed in Jesus as the Angel-Messiah, and Epiphanius 
asserts that they never changed their original doctrines 
(pp. 111-117). A special oath bound the initiated Essene 
4 not to communicate to any one their doctrines in any 
other way than lie has received them.' Thus innova- 
tions were excluded, and it becomes probable that the 
Essenes in the time of John expected an Angel-Messiah. 

The first Jew who can be proved to have applied 
this new Messianic doctrine to Jesus was Stephen, one 
of the Greek-speaking Jews, Grecians or Hellenists, 
ome of whom were from Alexandria, where the prin- 
cipal settlements of the Essenian Therapeuts were. We 


shall try to show that Stephen's doctrine of an Angel- 
Messiah, which Paul accepted, was an Essenic doctrine. 

Paul was probably among the men of Cilicia who 
took part in the disputations with Stephen ; and he was 
present at the death of the first martyr, previous to his 
journey to Damascus as leader of the persecution which 
arose ' because of Stephen.' The latter's co-religionists, 
distinguished from the Hebrews as Grecians in the Acts, 
were scattered, whilst the Apostles remained at Jeru- 
salem. Some of the scattered disciples went as far as 
Antioch ; and to this congregation or Church, founded 
independently from the Apostles at Jerusalem, Paul was 
introduced by Barnabas. His Epistle, cited as genuine 
by the unanimous voice of the ancient Church (pp. 323, 
324), proves him to have been an Essene and a preacher 
of Jesus, not as son of David, but as Son of God, as the 
Angel-Messiah whom the Essenes expected. After the 
conversion of Paul to the faith of Stephen, which once 
he destroyed, the new Apostle had accepted some of the 
doctrines of the universalist Therapeuts. Paul promul- 
gated by his Epistles the faith in Christ as the spiritual 
Pock which followed the Israelites, that is, as the Angel 
of whom Stephen had said, almost in the same words, 
that he had been with the fathers in the wilderness. 
In this sense Paul says that Christ was the man ' from 
heaven,' and that all things were by him created. 

The principal doctrines and rites of the Essenes can 
be connected with the East, with Parsism, and especially 
with Buddhism. Among the doctrines which Essenes 
and Buddhists had in common was that of the Angel- 
Messiah The remarkable parallels in the most ancient 
records of the lives of Gautama-Buddha and of Jesus 


Christ require explanation. They cannot all be attri- 
buted to chance or to importation from the West. 

We now possess an uninterrupted chain of Bud- 
dhist writings in China, * from at least 100 B.C. to 
a.d. 600,' according to Professor Beal. In the Chinese 
version of the Dhammapada, by him translated (No. 
xxxi. p. 142 f.), Buddha's sermon on ' Falsehood ' is fully 
given, which is alluded to by Asokain the second Bairat 
rock-inscription (see General Cunningham's Corpus 
Inscriptorum Indicarum, i. 132). Some discourses of 
Buddha were commonly known in India as early as 
Asoka at least, who, in B.C. 250, or 29 years before 
the destruction of Chinese books, is said to have sent 
the first Buddhist missionaries to China and to Ceylon. 

To Ceylon Asoka's son Mahinda, according to tradi- 
tion, took the Vinaya Pitaka or ' treasure-box,' the most 
ancient of the three Pitakas. The Northern or Chinese 
edition harmonises in all essential points with the 
Southern or Ceylon canon, though the connection be- 
tween the two schools was broken. The first canon is 
wrongly said to have been drawn up immediately after 
Buddha's death, 79 years after b.c. 473, or B.C. 394, ' a 
few years later than B.C. 400,' as Mr. Rhys Davids cor- 
rects the Ceylon date. It follows, that between B.C. 280 
and 150 the authors of the Septuagint, initiated in Essenic 
and Buddhistic tradition, as we here assume, reckoned 
backwards from B.C. 473, known as the date of Buddha's 
birth, the 440 years of the Greek text for the period from 
the third of Solomon to the Exodus, thence the 430 
years to Abraham's leaving Earan, and thus 1017 years 
were left for the period to the year of the flood, b.c. 
2360. The chronology of the Septuagint implies, that 


Buddha, (' a greater than Solomon ') Moses, Abraham, 
and Adam were precursors of Christ as incarnations of 
the Angel-Messiah. Had Philo and Josephus believed 
this, they would have recognised Jesus as the Christ. 

The object of the first attempt to connect Paul 
with the Essenes, and these with the expectation of 
an Angel-Messiah, is to explain the striking similarity 
between the Buddhistic and Christian Scriptures by a 
fusion of both traditions, as consciously effected by the 
Essenes. Thus the opinion of Eusebius will be con- 
firmed, who considered it ' highly probable ' that the 
writings of the Therapeuts, which they had received 
from the founders of their society, have been utilised in 
the composition of the four Gospels, of Paul's Epistles, 
and especially of the Epistle to the Hebrews. 

The principal result of this argument would be that 
Paul, not Jesus, was the cause of the separation between 
Judaism and Christianity. 

The germs of this separation can be traced back to 
the different symbolism, represented on one side by the 
Hebrews, on the other by the strangers in Israel, to whom 
the Eechabites and Essenes belonged. The ancestors of 
both had once lived under one roof in the East. Already 
the reformation of Brahmanism by Buddhism had shown, 
that the moral principle in man may lead to different sym- 
bols and rites, but that what Humanity has in common 
is sufficient for ' brethren to dwell together in unity.' 

Several centuries before the birth of Jesus Christ 
some figures of constellations had become symbols of 
moral doctrines. Sooner or later these were connected 
with transmitted words of Gautama-Buddha. The 
Cosmical had become to that extent the symbol of the 



Ethical, that the son of the virgin Maya, on whom, 
according to Chinese tradition, ' the Holy Ghost ' had 
descended, was said to have been born on Christmas- 
day, on the sun's birthday, at the commencement of the 
sun's apparent annual evolution round the earth. On 
that day, the sun having fully entered the winter- 
solstice, the sign of Virgo was rising on the Eastern hori- 
zon (pp. 23, 24). The woman's symbol of this stellar sign 
was represented first with ears of corn, then with a 
newborn child in her arms. Buddha was described as 
a superhuman organ of light, to whom a superhuman 
organ of darkness, Mara or Naga the evil serpent, was 
opposed (p. 39). Thus also Ormuzd, Osiris, Dionysos, 
and Apollos were described as divinities of light, op- 
posed by serpent-deities (p. 65). Finally, the Virgin- 
born Jesus Christ, « the Sun of Eighteousness ' (p. 307, 
note 1), was described as opposed by ' the old serpent,' 
the Satan, hinderer, or adversary. 

This symbolism was connected with the signs of the 
spring-equinox and of the autumn-equinox. The latter 
was once marked by the sign of Scorpio and by the con- 
stellation of the Serpent, which was represented as aiming 
at, and almost touching the heel of the Virgin-represen- 
tation on the sphere. These constellations and signs, 
especially the mystical sign of Virgo, have led man to 
compare with the cosmical fight between light and 
darkness the moral fight between good and evil. 

Whether the nature-symbol or the ethical idea be 
regarded as the first, the fact of a universal revelation, 
of a continuity of Divine influences everywhere and at 
all times, remains as the anchor of the soul, as the 
llock of Ages, on which Christ's Church will be built. 





Priestcraft and Magic Art — Brahin, Maya, and Bodhi — The Eastern 
Paramita and the Western Tradition — Jainism and Buddhism — 
The Sakas and Sakya-Muni — Records of Buddhistic Tradition . 1 



Buddha's birthday on Christinas-day — The Messianic Star — ' He that 
should come ' — Karma — Nirvana is the Sun — Salvation by Faith — 
Incarnation of the Virgin-son by 'the Holy Ghost' — Krishna — 
'Birth in an inn' — Heavenly host proclaim joy and peace — Asita, 
the Simeon of Buddhists — Presentation in the Temple when twelve, 
and public teaching when thirty years old — Temptation by Satan in 
the wilderness — Buddha, ' full of grace,' his body surrounded by a 
1 glory/ ' fiery tongues,' two men represented by his side — The 
Lamb (Aries) — Trees of life and of knowledge — Baptism in the 
holy stream — Transfiguration, or ' baptism of fire ' on a mount — No 
bloody sacrifices, &c. — Parable of the sower and the tares — The 
woman at the well — Promise of another Buddha — Miracles at 
Buddha's death — The tears of a weeping woman had wetted his 
feet before his death — How to explain the parallels between 
Buddhistic and Christian records — Continuity of Divine influences 18 



Introduction — Theory on the Origin of the Gods — Transmigration of 
souls — Eastern knowledge of Pythagoras- -The Goddess Flestia — 
Pythagoras arid the Dorians . . H'd 





Alexander, Asoka, and the Favthians, as pioneers of the Essenes — The 
three classes of the Magi and the Rabbis — Daniel and the Magi or 
Chaldseans — Probable Essenic origin of the Massora or Gnosis in 
Israel, and its introduction into the Septuagint . . . .77 



Messianic conceptions in East and AYest — The anointed Angel and the 
anointed Man — Essenic expectation of an Angel-Messiah — The 
Eastern source of that and similar doctrines explains the parallels 
between the earliest Buddhistic and the earliest Christian records — 
Wheu was the doctrine of the Angel-Messiah applied to Jesus 
Christ, as it had been applied to Gautama-Buddha? . . . 104 



The stranger in Israel — Jesus and the Essenes — Jesus and the hidden 
wisdom — Jesus and the sacrifice —Jesus the Messiah— Conclusion . 138 



The Hellenists — The person of Christ — Christ and the Spirit of God — 
The resurrection of Christ — Apparitions of Jesus after death — The 
day of Pentecost — The Atonement— Retrospect .... 168 



Introduction — The Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews — 'The 
Highpnest of our confession ' — Conclusion 241 



The Problem — The Herodians and the Essenes — The descent of James 
— James the Nazarite and Highpriest — The Epistle of James . . 261 



Essenic Scriptures — The Epistles of John — Retrospect — General Con- 
clusion : The Roman Church ........ 282 


Notes On Farrar's < Life and Work of St. Paul ' 379 




Priestcraft and Magic Art — Brahin, Maya, and Bodhi — The Eastern Para* 
niita and the Western Tradition — Jainism and Buddhism — The Sakas 
and Sakya-Mimi — Becords of Buddhistic Tradition. 

Priestcraft and Magic Art. 

Buddhistic tradition is a comparatively late deposit of 
ancestorial wisdom, written or unwritten. It can be 
rendered probable, though it cannot be proved, that 
such deeper knowledge Was confined to a select number 
of initiated, among whom the mysteries were trans- 
mitted from one generation to another; Such an organi- 
sation for the transmission of knowledge withheld from 
the people, presupposes firmly established priestly insti- 
tutions and a secluded mode of life, regulated by severe 
customs. Of an ascetic system like this there is no trace 
among the East-Iranians, who were the representatives 
of Zoroastrian doctrines, a source from which Buddhism 
certainly lias drawn. It is exceedingly strange, that 
although India is the country where such institutions 
and customs seem to have originated, yet that they 
were not established there at the indefinite time when 
the most ancient Indian records, the Veda, were com- 
posed in the Indus valley, and before the Aryan con- 
querors had established themselves on the Ganges. A 
comparison of the Yeda with the book of Manu, 



containing the sacred law of the Brahmans on the 
Ganges, marks a peculiar development among the 
Indians ; and we arrive at a similar result by a com- 
parison of the Zendavesta with the books and rites of 
the Magi or priests of the Medes in Mesopotamia, 
whereby a contrast is established between the Iranians 
of the East and those of the West. 

These two hotbeds of priestcraft, cradles of hier- 
archical institutions and of asceticism in East and West, 
offer some important points of analogy, which render 
it at the outset not improbable that there was some 
kind of connection between the institutions on the 
banks of the Euphrates and Tigris, and those which 
prevailed in the valley of the Ganges. Both Indian 
communities, that on the Indus and that on the Ganges, 
worshipped Indra, as both the eastern and the western 
community of Iranians worshipped Ormuzd. Yet the 
Aryans on the Indus must have despised their brethren 
on the Ganges, as the East-Iranians certainly despised 
their brethren, the Magi or priests of the Medes, in the 
west of the Caspian. This was the country of wicked 
doubt ; where the bodies of the dead, instead of being 
burnt in accordance with East-Iranian custom, were 
buried in the earth, thus desecrating it. Such separate 
development and antagonism is all the more significant, 
since the Medes were once all Aryans, and since they 
continued in the West to venerate the symbolism of the 
East-Iranians. Thus a system of dualism had sprung 
up, which in its popular form and interpretation mili- 
tated against the monotheism of the Ormuzd religion, 
although the Magi recognised the same. The con- 
sideration of this parallel development among the 
Eastern Indians and among the Western Iranians is a 
necessary introduction to the history of the origin and 
propagation of Buddhism. 

'The highest development of the Brahmanic system 
is based on the diametrical contrast of body and soul, of 


matter and spirit. Considering the body as impure by 
itself, Brahmanism was forced to set up, not only the 
demand of a continuous taming and subjecting of sensu- 
ality by the spirit, but to declare, in the last instance, the 
destruction of the body as the only true purity. From 
this theory, followed, practically, the injuring of the 
body by ascetic impossibilities. The Zendavesta does 
not know these premises. The Zendavesta likewise 
separates body and soul, the spiritual from the material 
world ; also it is not wanting in abstraction, and those 
hosts of spirits who people heaven are, if taken by 
themselves, in part very deep-meaning conceptions of 
spiritual powers, although from the standpoint of a 
natural and poetical religious spirit they are pale alle- 
gories. But the Indian antagonism between the spiritual 
and the bodily world is unknown to the Zendavesta. 
The pure and holy spirits have created the world of the 
senses, not in order to entangle man in darkness and 
evil, but in order to give him life and prosperity. Here 
the evil is limited to only one side of this world of 
senses, to darkness, drought, desert, and death ; whilst 
in India the evil spreads over the whole matter, and 
this bad side of nature has not emanated from the pure 
but from the impure spirits. Since, according to the 
Zendavesta, only a part of nature is separated as evil, 
man has not to put off his entire nature, but to rejoice 
in the good side of it, to strengthen the same in and 
around himself, and to observe a defensive, guarding, 
and fighting attitude against the evil side of nature 
only. Thus self-preservation, instead of self-destruction, 
is set up for man as his aim and end : thus practical and 
obtainable objects are held out to man ; thus are given 
the conditions of a healthy and active human existence, 
which have led to other results, than those to which 
Indians have been led by the contemplation, the quietism, 
the monkish asceticism, and the relapses into sensuous 
excesses which are inseparably connected with the former. 


In Iran no supernatural purity at the cost of life was 
aimed at, as in India ; in Iran purity was practised in 
order to live, in order not to be harmed and killed by 
the Daeva (or evil spirit), but not in order to die as in 
India.' 1 

Among the Brahmans as among the Magi the inter- 
vention and mediation of priests was held to be neces- 
sary, and even in the law-book of Manu, still more in 
the later Sutras or theological heirlooms, with their 
higher development of the ceremonial, the laity was 
absolutely excluded from every active participation in 
the sacred rites. In Hymns of the Eig-Veda are already 
mentioned priests on whose prayers victory was considered 
to depend . Contrariwise, the hymns attributed to Zoroaster 
know only of holy rites performed by pure men, and 
even the East-Iranian later tradition, which was recorded 
in the Zendavesta after the recognition of an order of 
priests, admits by the side of the Atharva, or fire-priests, 
all ' pure men ' to the performance of holy rites. The 
name Magi, by which the West-Iranian priests were 
called, is unknown to the ancient parts of the Zendavesta. 
We know of no Medes without Magi, and it is probable 
though not provable, that the Median conquerors of 
Mesopotamia, the Casdim or Chaldeans, in the year 
B.C. 2458, already had Magi as priests. For already in 
the time of Dejokes, since B.C. 711, the Magi are con- 
nected with an old-established institution ; whilst in the 
Book of Daniel the Magi are identified with the Chal- 
deans. Cyrus introduced or recognised the Magi among 
the Persians ; yet these always regarded the Medes and 
Magi as their enemies, and the rule of Pseudo-Smerdis 
is represented as an attempt of the Magi to set up 
Median instead of Persian rule. 

The Brahimtnic and the Magian systems of religion 
both required the mediation of priests as organs of the 
supernatural power Maya or Maga ; and these institu- 

1 Duncker, Gcschichte des Alterthuma \\., 387-388. 


tions on the Ganges and Euphrates were based on the 
most ancient ancestorial rite of invoking the aid of good 
spirits against evil spirits. This would naturally lead 
to the offering of bloody sacrifices as a means of recon- 
ciling the offended deity. Human sacrifices and animal 
sacrifices for the purpose of atonement had prevailed in 
the earliest historical times among the Hamitic or non- 
Aryan races in East and West. By an ethnological and 
geographical explanation of the 10th chapter of Genesis, 
the Hamites, probably once an unmixed black-skinned 
race, can be shown to have spread from India, by 
Arabia, Egypt, Nubia, and Canaan, to Mesopotamia, as 
the earliest historical inhabitants of the West, an indefi- 
nite time before that country was conquered, according 
to Berosus in B.C. 2458, by the Medo-Chaldeans. It is 
provable that the mixed race of Iranian conquerors of 
Babylon and non-Iranian, probably Indian, builders of 
Babylon, that the first so-called Semitic nation of the 
West which rose to political power x did not abolish the 
bloody sacrifices, especially those at the time of the 
spring-equinox. Gradually animals were substituted 
for human beings. It is important to bear in mind, 
that these West-Iranian worshippers of Ormuzd, the 
Median conquerors or Chaldeans of Mesopotamia in the 
third pre-Christian millennium, did not teach, like their 
Zoroastrian brethren in the East, that bloody sacrifices 
are an abomination to the God of light and truth. 

The Egyptian Book of the Dead and the Mesopota- 
mian books on magic prove that in both countries 
magic art existed in remote ages. Copies of the Chal- 

1 Shem's birth, wliich we explain ethnically, was by Israelites held to 
have taken place in the year of this Median conquest, in B.C. 2458 ; for, ac- 
cording to Genesis, Shem was an hundred years old ' two years after the 
flood ' (xi. 10), and the year of the Noachian flood was by the Hebrews, 
according to Censorinus and Varro, computed to have been B.C. 2360 (E. de 
Bunsen, The Chronology of the Bible, p. 11), Japhet + Ham = Shem. In fact, 
Japhet did dwell ' in the tents of Shem,' and Canaan the Ilamite was his 
servant or slave. The Casdim were Medes and became Shemites. 


dean work on magic were placed in the library of the 
famous school for priests at Erech (Huruk ?) near Ur, 
the present Mngheir, in the low country near the 
Persian Gulf. Magic rites and the worship of elements 
can be proved to have preceded in Mesopotamia the 
connection of deities with stars, and therefore to have 
preceded the solar symbolism for a longer time. Yet 
sidereal religion prevailed in this country before the 
invention of writing, since the earliest symbol of a deity 
known to us w T as a star. Thus the deity Sibut, pro- 
bably connected with the Pleiades, is determined by a 
star with the number seven by its side. Already, about 
B.C. 2000, Sargon I. compiled his astrological work, 
which began with collections of liturgical hymns and 
magical formulas. 1 The sacrifice of children in Meso- 
potamia is by Inscriptions proved to have taken place 
before the time of Abraham, 2 and the belief in the 
atoning virtue of such offerings for sin must have been 
preceded by a belief in the virtue of magic rites. We 
are thus enabled to assert, that magic rites were in- 
troduced into Mesopotamia an indefinite time before 

Even in much later times, the Mesopotamian magician 
Balaam commenced his rite by sacrifice. The Mosaic 
law forbids practisers of divinations, workers of hidden 
arts, augurers, enchanters, fabricators of charms, in- 
quirers by a familiar spirit, wizards or consulters of 
the dead, and the law couples with these ancient magic 
rites the condemnation of sons and daughters bein^ 
offered by fire. Abraham himself, the son of Terah, 
was by Arabian tradition said to have been a maker of 
idols or teraphim, such as existed in the family of 
Laban, who even called them his gods, as Micah, the 
Levite, did later. It has been pointed out that the 
Egyptians connected their magic figure or mummy, 

1 Lenormant, Chaldean Magic (Cooper's edition), pp. 333, 3G9, Note 1. 
% Sayce, Trans. Bibl. Arch. iv. 1. 


their Shebtee, with the word ' Ter,' which in the pre- 
Semitic language of Egypt seems to have denoted an 
idol, what the Hebrews called a ter a. This probability 
is almost raised to a certainty by the Arabian tradition 
just mentioned, which connects the son of Terah, a wor- 
shipper of strange gods, according to a Mosaic scripture, 
with teraphim or idols of his making. For the origin 
of such tradition would be inexplicable if the word 
' ter ' had not at some early time designated an idol in 
Arabian. This it certainly did in Egyptian, and also in 
Hebrew, as the word ' teraphim ' denotes. The Egyptian 
word ' ter ' signifies a shape, type, transformation, and 
has for its determinative a mummy ; it is used in the 
Eittial, where the various transformations of the de- 
ceased in Hades are described. The small mummy - 
shaped figure, Shebtee, usually made of baked clay 
covered with a blue vitreous varnish, representing the 
Egyptian as deceased, is of a nature connecting it with 
magic, since it was made with the idea that it secured 
benefits in Hades. It is connected with the word ' ter,' 
for it represents a mummy, the determinative of that 
word, and was considered to be of use in the state in 
which the deceased passed through transformations, 
4 term' 1 

The belief in one God was probably imported into 
the West by the Medo-Chaldean conquerors who lived 
in Ur-Casdim in the time of Terah and his ancestors. 
This belief would by the Hebrew of later times be 
opposed to the worship of ' other gods,' symbolised by 
teraphim or idols. Joshua declared Terah to have been 
such a worshipper of other gods, and the name Terah 
points to the teraphim or idols, which also his son 
Abram is said to have made according to the Arabian 
tradition already referred to. ' Thus saith the Lord God 
of Israel, Your fathers dwelt on the other side of the 

1 R. S. Poole, Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, ' Magic,' 


flood in old time, even Terah, the father of Abraham, 
and the father of Nachor: and they served other gods.' 
This statement of Joshua confirms that of Moses, whose 
mother's name, Jokhebed, is a compound of the Jeho- 
vistic form ' Jo,' and to whom God revealed his name 
Jehovah, saying that by this name he ' was not known ' 
to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to whom he appeared 
by the name of El-Shaddai — God Almighty — literally, 
' God Powerful.' Another passage shows that Abram 
8 lifted up his hand,' and swore, or literally ' did seven,' 
by Eljun or El-On, God the Highest. 1 

It may, therefore, be now asserted, that magic art 
was established in Mesopotamia an indefinite time be- 
fore Terah, who lived, if the transmitted year B.C. 23G0 
was the year of the Flood, from B.C. 2138-1933. We 
may go further and safely assume that the invocation 
of spirits, perhaps originally the worship of ancestors, 
was connected with the worship of elements and of 
stars, and that what sooner or later was called ' magic 
art ' had preceded the capture of Babylon, in B.C. 2458, 
by the Mecles. For the purpose here in view it is 
enough to have pointed out that magic art existed in 
Mesopotamia before the time of Terah, who 4 served 
other gods.' 

Many centuries before the Vedic Hymns are sup- 
posed to have been written, in which there is no trace 
of priestcraft or magic art, the latter, whether under 
that name or not, was established in the West, possibly 
seventeen centuries earlier than the generally assumed 
date when the Vedic Hymns were recorded. The 
Aryans on the Indus neither imported any magic art 

1 Josh. xxiv. 2; Ex. vi. 2; Gen. xiv. 19-22; comp. Deut. xxxii. 6; 
Prov. viii. 22 ; Ps. cxix. 13. The name Osiris, derived from Wasar, means 
il"' elevated one or 'the Highest,' like the name Zeus of Homer and 
Hyperion of Hesiodus. All these names of divinities can be connected, like 
Sibut~Sebaot, with the Pleiades, so that the 'sevening'of Abram may be 
referred to the god dwelling in this constellation of seven stars (See our 
Die Tlejaden und der Y'/mr/.rm, 80-81 &c.) 


from the North-west, nor acknowledged the same among 
the subjugated non-Aryan population on the Indus. 
The aborigines of India may, however, be assumed to 
have long before the Aryan conquest worshipped ele- 
ments, stars, and constellations, if not ancestors, and to 
have invoked good spirits against evil ones. What was 
sooner or later in the West called ' magic art ' was pro- 
bably on the Ganges in after- Yedic and Brahmanic 
times connected with the Brahm, or spiritual power, 
which was only another name for the Maya of the 

Brahm, Maya, and Bodhi. 

It remains quite uncertain at what time previous to 
the publication of the Law-book of Manu (about B.C. 
700 ? ) the Indian asceticism arose which was connected 
with the name of Brahma. The higher being who 
represents this divine power, or the Brahm, that is, the 
divine mediator, the Brahma, who hears man praying 
by this divine guide, was called Brahmanaspati, or 
6 lord of prayer.' Even the highest God was regarded 
as an organ of this holy and eternal Brahm, and man 
can, though the same, secure the answer to his prayer, 
even immortality, for the spiritual power connects him 
with higher organs of the same. 1 The conception of 
this Brahm as the holy spirit of both worlds is es- 
sentially identical with the conception of the Maya 
or spiritual power. It can now be shown, as we 
shall see, that this supernatural or spiritual power is 
recorded to have descended as ' Holy Ghost ' upon 
Maya, the virgin-mother of Gautama-Buddha. It may 
be safely assumed that the Magi in the West were 
aboriginally so called after the Maga or Maya ; and 
it is quite possible that the Median tribe of the Budii 

1 Comp. Dimeter, I. c. ii. 05, GO ; Spiegel, Z&ndavesta, Yagna, xix. 10-29; 
32, 35. 


were so called after the Bodhi or Wisdom taught on the 

The Bodhi, Wisdom from above, or Tradition from 
beyond, must be connected if not identified with the 
spiritual power or Maya, and thus with the universal 
spirit or Brahm. It has been well said, that ' Gautama's 
whole training was Brahmanism : he probably deemed 
himself to be the most correct exponent of the spirit, 
as distinct from the letter, of ancient faith ; and it can 
only be claimed for him that he was the greatest and 
wisest and best of the Hindus.' x Yet we shall point 
out, that there is sufficient reason to regard him as a 
non-Indian by descent. His probable connection with 
the East-Iranians is confirmed by the presumable fact, 
that the doctrines of Zoroaster were as well known by 
Gautama as by the initiated Hindus, though they hid 
this knowledge more or less from the people. As the in- 
carnation of the celestial Buddha was effected by the 
Holy Ghost, so it was this spiritual power, Maya or 
Brahm, which enlightened Gautama, and made him the 
human organ of the celestial Bodhi or Wisdom. The 
meaning of the word ' Buddh,' or ' Bodh,' corresponds 
with that of the Sanscrit Yid, from which the name 
Yeda is derived. ' Yeda ' means knowledge, and ' Bodhi ' 
means wisdom. It seems that Gautama-Buddha was 
initiated in the secret tradition of this Bodhi ; but 
there are only few traces in Buddhistic writings of such 
a hidden wisdom, and they leave it uncertain whether 
the novitiate of the later disciples dates from the time 
of Gautama. We know, however, that not all his self- 
chosen disciples were beggars or Bhikshus, though 
Sramans, or tamers of the senses. Their instruction 
varied probably in kind and quantity, according to 
their individual capabilities. Gautama was only accom- 
panied by five disciples, when he underwent a severe 
probation of six years. 

1 Ilhys Davids, Buddhism, 85. 


The Eastern Pdramita and the Western Tradition. 

The Buddhists distinguish two classes of tradition. 
They divide their theological heirlooms, in a restricted 
sense the transmitted sayings of Buddha, into Sutras of 
the great and of the small chariot, thus distinguishing 
the Mahay ana from the Hinayana. 1 Possibly the chariot 
of tradition, or conveyance of enlightenment, referred 
to the sun, which is already in the Veda and Zendavesta 
connected with horses, whilst before the Babylonian 
captivity, chariots and horses of the sun were regarded 
as symbols of the Deity by some of the Israelites in 
Jerusalem. From indeterminable times the chariot of 
the sun-god Apollos was represented as drawn by four 

The Hebrew word for chariot, Bechab, from which 
the name of the Eechabites ^(Essenes ?) is derived, is of 
Iranian origin, and it forms part of the word Merkabah, 
by which the unwritten tradition or gnosis of the 
Israelites was designated. The first part of the holy 
Merkabah was called ' The History of Creation,' and 
the second part, ' The History of the Chariot.' This 
twofold division in the record of Hebrew tradition may 
be compared with the twofold division in the records 
of Buddhistic tradition, that is, with the Sutras of the 
great and of the small chariot. The Buddhists who 
belong to the higher grades of initiation in the mysteries 
of tradition, know and revere the Prashna Paramita, 
literally the science, wisdom, or tradition 'from beyond.' 
Whilst Prashna means knowledge, wisdom, or Bodhi, 
Paramita means brought ' from beyond.' The w^ord is 
derived from ' para ' and ' ita,' the former meaning 'across,' 
over, or beyond,' and the latter word is formed after 

1 In course of time the Northern Buddhists called their developed tradi- 
tion the Mahayaua, inasmuch as it differed from the shorter tradition of the 
Southern Buddhists, which their rivals called the Hinayana. The Lamaism 
of Thibet is the very opposite of original Buddhism, and may be connected 
with the schism created by Gautama's cousin Pevadatta. 


' emi,' to go. 1 The Latin word traditio has absolutely 
the same meaning, being a composite of trans, across, 
over, beyond, and ire, to go. 

Thus a connection is established between the mean- 
ing of the Western word ' tradition ' and the meaning of 
the Eastern word ' paramita,' as also between the Hebrew 
word ' merkabah ' for the unwritten tradition, and the 
Sutras, the once unwritten tradition of the Buddhists, 
and of the Jainists, who preceded them. But as it is 
non-proven that the new elements of tradition intro- 
duced by Jews after the return from Babylon, had been 
already by Moses transmitted to the elders, and by 
them to future generations, so it is not provable that 
the followers of Buddha were in possession of a hidden 
wisdom, verbally transmitted by Buddha, and even by 
those who preceded him, in promulgating a Zoroastrian 
tradition. The Buddhistic Paramita or tradition was 
designated as ' from beyond,' no doubt in order to 
point to the super-terrestrial and supernatural origin of 
its contents. It was, as we shall see, the wisdom from 
above, brought down by the Angel-Messiah, the bringer 
of the Spirit of God. 

Jainism and Buddhism. 

It is certain that the Buddhism which was con- 
nected with Gautama, constitutes a late development of 
Jainism. 2 According to Jainas and Buddhists, the 
words Jina and Buddha have the same meaning ; and 
the last of the twenty-four Jaina Tirthankaras or 
Buddhas, called Mahavira, who died 527 B.C., is stated 
to have been the teacher of the Gautama of the 
Jainists, who is also the Gautama of the Buddhists. 
But Gautama, who seems by some of his followers to 
have been raised to the rank of a deified saint, was not 
recognised by the Jainas as a Buddha. One and the 

1 Beal, Buddhist Pilgrims, 59. 

2 Thomas, Jainism, or the Early Faith o/Asoka. 

gautama's descent. is 

same person was by some in India regarded as an 
anointed man, by others as an anointed angel. 

The five duties of Jainism are : mercy to all animated 
beings, almsgiving, venerating the sages while living 
and worshipping their images when deceased, confession 
of faults, and religions fasting. The five sins are : killing, 
lying, stealing, adultery, worldly-mindedness. Only the 
first five of the ten commandments of the Buddhists 
are by the text referred back to Gautama himself, and 
they forbid to kill that which has life, to steal, to lie, 
to drink intoxicating liquors, and to commit unchaste 
acts. 1 The nude statues of Jaina saints or Arhats have 
been connected with the Buddhist ascetics, whom the 
Chinese pilgrim, Hiouen Thsang, in the seventh century 
of our era, designated as a Buddhist sect in India. 
They did not entirely shave their heads, and walked 
naked, except when they wore a white covering, perhaps 
only during the performance of certain rites. So also 
the nude representations of Vittal or Vithoba, who in 
the Dekkan is held to be an avatar of Siva, have been 
compared with the normal ideals of the Jaina statues, 
as preserved by the sculptured monuments of Mathura, 
with their appropriate devotional dedications by the 
votaries of the Jaina faith, ' at or about the commence- 
ment of our era.' 2 

The Sahas and Sdkya-Muni. 

The Vittal or Viddhal to whom Buddhistic Scriptures 
refer, are supposed to have been connected with the 
Ephthalites, or White Huns of the Byzantines. 8 The 
Huns had still in late times white and black tribes, and 
the Ephthalites came from the Oxus and Indus. The 

1 The number five is provably a more ancient nature-symbol than the 
number ten. 

8 Thomas, I. c. 79-82. 

3 Mr. Wylie, cited in Baal's Buddhist Tripitaka of China and Japan, 
p. 117. 


Hindus referred the name Huns to Thibetan tribes, 
and they were perhaps called Huns after Thibet. This 
name the Mahomedans have introduced, and the country 
of Thibet is still called Huncles, the word being pro- 
bably derived from Hyun-des, which means snow-land, 
like Himalaya, Iniaus, and Emans. 1 The white or 
Aryan Huns were always distinguished from the bar- 
barous so-called Scythian or Sarmatian Huns. 2 The 
Aryan Huns were probably a cognate race with the 
Royal tribe (Amyrgian Scythians ?) whom Herodotus 
distinguishes among the so-called Scythians or Sacas, 
the Haka of the Chinese, and the Saka of Persian 
Inscriptions, whose principal seats seem to have been 
near the Oxus, 

Like the Saka, the Parthians were, in part, perhaps 
chiefly Iranian Aryans. But the Parthians, the Parthwa 
in Inscriptions of Persian kings, when first mentioned 
by the Greeks, lived nearer to the Medes, to the east of 
them. Where the Parthians originally came from is 
uncertain, but it is not improbable that they had crossed 
the Indian frontier and lived in Iran as strangers. For 
Justin states that their name was derived from the 
Sanscrit Pardes, which means i of another country,' or 
' the country from beyond,' whilst in Iranian (Zend) 
Parda, like the Sanscrit Parada, means a person who 
has come across the border. 3 

1 Markham on ' Bogle in Thibet,' and the article ' Tibet,' in the Times, 
May 15, 1876. 

2 With 'Hun' the name Hun(g")ari may have been connected, as in like 
manner the name of the Gipsies, the Zigauner, Zingari, or Singari, seems to 
have been a compound of Seind-Ari, which is still a local name in India. 
For their national name Sinte (also Itoma) points to Scindia, Hindia, or 
India. It is certain from their language that the Gipsies are descended from 
Indian Aryans, that they are, as their name Singari implies, Seind-Ari ; and 
the dispersion of the Gipsies has been identified with the chastisement of 
the Jat-tribes on the Indus by the Sultan of Ghazni, in the year a.d. 1025. 
{Edinburgh Review, July, 1878). Also the name Ar-Sakes probably points 
to the Aryans among the Saka. 

3 Benfey, in Berliner Jahrbiicher, 1842 ; Spiegel's Bran, 105. The name 


About the year 600 B.C. the so-called Scythians, or 
rather Sakas, made their inroads into India from the 
North, and gradually advanced to Mesopotamia and 
Asia Minor. ' King of the Sakas ' was still in the first 
pre-Christian century a title in Northern India. 1 From 
these Iranian Sakas was most probably descended 
Sakya- or Gautama-Buddha. Had the Sakas been 
natives of India it would be difficult to explain the fact 
that no Indian documents, except Buddhistic writings, 
ever mention them. The Sakya-prince is described 
as an Aryan by Buddhistic tradition. His face was 
reddish, his hair of light colour and curly, his general 
appearance of great beauty. He married a wife from 
his own kin ; and in harmony with the rites of Northern 
tribes, he was interred under a mound surrounded by 
stones. 2 

Records of Buddhistic Tradition. 

Which were the fundamental principles of the ' Tra- 
dition from beyond,' said to have been promulgated by 
Gautama, according to the most ancient records known 
to us of the life of Buddha ? We now possess a Chinese 
translation of a Sanscrit work on the life of Buddha, 
which is remarkable for brevity and completion. It is 
probably — in some of its essential parts at least — a 
translation of the original work or copy from which 
the expanded version was made, known in Thibet and 
China under the title ' Lalita-Vistara,' or Ta-Chwang- 
yen, ' great magnificence.' This primitive work, known 
under two forms of the same title, was translated into 
Chinese from Sanscrit, by a priest called Chu-fa-lan, as 

Hebrews, or people from "beyond (like ' Saracens ' ?), has the same meaning aa 
Parthians. The Aryan word Pardes occurs in the Song of Solomon, in 
Ecclesiastic us, and Xehemiah. The authors of the Septuagint, who like 
Ezekiel (xxviii. 13, 14) connected Eden with the East, have formed from 
Pardes, or from the Sanscrit Paradeca, ' highland,' the word Paradise. 

1 Beal, On Buddhism, Orient, v. 47 f. 

2 Tercy Gardner, Numismatic Chronicle, vol. xiv. 161-1G7, 


earl} 7 as the eleventh year of the reign of Wing-ping 
(Ming-ti) of the Han dynasty, that is, 69 or 70 a.d. 
' We may, therefore,' says Professor Beal, ' safely sup- 
pose that the original work was in circulation in India 
for some time previous to this date.' 

He adds, ' The (Buddhistic) books found in China 
afford us a consecutive catena of writings dating from 
at least B.C. 100 to a.d. 600.' In the Chinese copy of 
the Dhammapada or ' Parables illustrating scriptural 
extracts or verses,' composed by Arya Dharmatrata, 
that is Yasamitra, about B.C. 40, 1 is the Sutra alluded 
to by Asoka in the stone-cut Bhabra edict, and 
known as Gautama's exhortation to his son Eahula 
against falsehood. 2 It is therefore now proved that we 
possess a Chinese Buddhistic writing, part of which 
points back to the time of Asoka, who ascended the 
throne B.C. 268, and convoked the general council at 
Patna in B.C. 250. 

This newly ascertained fact gains in importance 
when we consider that the stone-cut Bhabra edict refers 
to then existing records of well authenticated words 
of Buddha, and that the first Buddhist missionaries 
whom Asoka sent to China, where they are still re- 
verenced as saints, can now be asserted to have intro- 
duced into this country these records of the divine 
Buddha's sayings to which Asoka's stone- cut edict 
refers. It becomes therefore increasingly probable 
that the stone-cut representations on the gateway of 
the Buddhist monument called the Sanchi Tope, pro- 
bably copied from earlier Avooden representations, and 

1 According to Eitel, Vasamitra ' took a principal part in the last revi- 
sion of the Canon, as the President of the Synod under Kanishka.' If the 
latter's date is about B.C. 40, that of Dharmatrata would be about 
B.C. 70. 

2 Beal, The Romantic History of Buddha, p. vi. ; The Dhammapada, 
p. xi. The reference to the Bhabra edict was first announced by Mr. Beal, 
in a lecture delivered by him since the publication of the Dhammapada 


which refer to subjects treated by Buddhist legends, 
date from a pre-Christian time. 1 

A considerable part of the Buddhist legends trans- 
mitted to us by the most ancient Buddhist literature 
may be safely asserted to date back to pre-Christian 
times. This will become a certainty if we succeed in 
proving that the foreign elements represented by Jewish 
Essenes in pre-Christian times are in part, if not chiefly, 
Buddhistic. What was known in Judaea more than 
a century before the birth of Jesus Christ cannot 
have been introduced among Buddhists by Chris- 
tian missionaries. It will become equally certain that 
the bishop and church-historian Eusebius was right 
when he wrote, that he considered it ' highly probable ' 
that the writings of the Essenic Therapeuts in Egypt 
had been incorporated into our Gospels and into some 
Pauline Epistles. 

1 As asserted by General Cunningham, an opinion shared by the author 
of the Guide Book to the Kensington Museum, where a representation of 
this monument can be seen. The brick tope is traced to the years B.C. 500- 
443, the surrounding structure to B.C. 260, and the gates to a.d. 19-37. 




Buddha's birthday on Christmas-day — 'The Messianic Star—' He that should 
come ' — Karma — Nirvana is the Sun — Salvation by Faith — Incarnation 
of the Virgin-son by ' the Holy Ghost '—Krishna— ' Birth in an inn' 
—Heavenly host proclaim joy and peace — Asita, the Simeon of Bud- 
dhists — Presentation in the Temple when twelve, and public teaching 1 
when thirty years old — Temptation by Satan in the wilderness— Buddha, 
'full of grace,' his body surrounded by a 'glory,' 'fiery tongues,' two ' 
men represented by his side— The Lamb (Aries) — Trees of life and of 
knowledge — Baptism in the holy stream— Transfiguration, or ' baptism of 
fire ' on a mount — No bloody sacrifices, &c. — Parable of the sower and 
the tares — The woman at the well — Promise of another Buddha — 
Miracles at Buddha's death — The tears of a weeping woman had wetted 
his feet before his death — How to explain the parallels between Buddhistic 
and Christian records — Continuity of Divine influences. 

Buddha's Birthday on Christmas-day. 

According to Sanscrit and Chinese scriptures, to the 
stone-cut edicts of Asoka and the Sanchi Tope, certain 
legends about Buddha circulated in India and in China, 
not only before the close of the Apostolic age, but more 
than three centuries earlier. Among these legends the 
most ancient are those which refer to the incarnation 
of Buddha as Angel-Messiah. 

Prophecies have directed the attention of men to 
the Tath&gatha, literally to ' Him that should come,' to 
' the Anointed,' the Messiah or Kung-teng of the Chinese. 
The expectation of this Messiah and of the kingdom 
which he should set up is a general one. He will come 
from heaven, be born in the flesh, attested by miracles, 
bring to earth the highest wisdom from above, the 
Bodhi from beyond ; he aviII establish a kingdom of 


heavenly truth and justice, live as a man, then die and 
return to heaven. Like his mother, he will be of royal, 
not of priestly descent, and genealogies will prove this. 
The Messiah inhabits the fourth or Tusita-heaven, a 
1 certain locality described as a circle, and which is dis- 
tinguished from « the worlds above Tusita,' thus also 
from the highest material heavens. Apart from all 
these, a non-material locality seems to be implied where 
the highest God dwells, to whom Buddha is said to 
have prayed, as to the self-dependent and creating God, 
Isvara-Deva. So long as Buddha is in the Tusita- 
heaven, he is not yet at the height of his development, 
and he looks forward to the time after his last birth, 
the birth on earth, when the ways will be open to him 
which lead to what is called Nirvana, or destruction, 
but at the same time to the ' final resting-place of the 
spirit,' the locality to which men long to come, where 
' the harvest ' takes place. 

We leave the question for the present as an open 
one, whether the Nirvana was held to be or not the 
dwelling-place of the god to whom Buddha prayed, the 
man who as an Iranian could not have been an Atheist. 
But what is said about the non-material nature of the 
Nirvana is also said about Isvara-Deva, * the universal 
spirit,' later called ' all the Buddhas,' about the abso- 
lutely immaterial spirit, who is so unlike Buddha before 
his incarnation — absolutely independent of all influences 
of matter, being the Maha-Brahma, to whose ' bright 
body' Buddha will resemble, Buddha is yet exposed to 
these material influences even in the fourth heaven, 
which comparative ' glory ' he is resolved to give up for 
a time in order to attain his final birth, that in the flesh. 1 

In accordance with recorded Zoroastrian doctrines, 
Gautama seems to have believed and taught, that ' the 
good and most holy Father of all truth ' is the source of 
the supernatural light, of the spiritual power, wisdom, 

1 Romantic History of Buddha, pp. 24, 77, 113. 
c 2 


or Bodhi, and thus of the moral element in man. 
Gautama was considered by his followers to have been 
a chosen instrument of that Divine power, as Angel and 
as Man. The Divine Wisdom, personified by the heavenly 
Buddha, becomes man, according to Iranian tradition, 
and it had a pre-mundane personal existence according 
to Zoroastrian and to Buddhistic records. It is owing 
to this Divine power which is in the incarnate Buddha, 
that with uplifted eyes, and turned to the East, he can 
pray to the highest Spirit, and be at one with him. It 
is only as the highest organ of the spiritual power, pro- 
ceeding from the highest Spirit, that Gautama could be 
by some conceived as the source of the world. He was 
called its developer, and was in this sense identified with 
Isvara-Deva, the Creator, to whom he prayed. 

At a certain time, which is not clearly defined, 
Gautama was established ' in the condition of a Buddha, 
free for ever from the possibility of sorrow and pain, 
and was therefore named Djina (the vanquisher), 
possessed of all wisdom, versed in the practice of it, 
perfectly acquainted with it, firmly grounded in the 
ways of heaven and in the ways of purity and holiness, 
possessed of independent being, like all the lords of the 
world (all Buddhas), ready to accommodate himself to 
all possible circumstances.' ! As a spirit in the fourth 
heaven, he resolves to give up ' all that glory, in order 
to be born in the world,' for the purpose ' to rescue all 
men from their misery and every future consequence of 
it ' ; he vows ' to deliver all men, who are left as it were 
without a saviour.' He is called ' the great Physician,' 
Healer or Saviour, the Bhagavat or ' Blessed One,' the 
Saviour of the World, the * God among gods.' 2 

The time of this heavenly Buddha's incarnation is 
marked by various statements. It is asserted to have 

1 Horn. Hist., 278, 2, 53, 7G, 130, 133. 

2 Thus .also Serosh was identified with Orninzd and the Divine Word, 
Memra of the Taimimim witli Jehovah. 


taken place on the eighth day of the second month of 
spring : we hope to prove conclusively that this is our 

In his treatise on the Yedic Calendar Jyotisham, 
Weber justly complains that all former works on Indian 
astronomy are based on such documents as were com- 
posed after that the last development of astronomy in 
India had been reached. The comparison of the most 
ancient calendars known to us has led Mr. E. G. Hali- 
burton, of Nova Scotia, to prove, that a New Year's 
festival connected with and determined by the Pleiades 
was, by almost universal custom, and partly in times 
called pre-historic, connected with a three days' festival 
of the dead. It corresponded with the Christian festivals 
of All Saints and All Souls, at the beginning of Novem- 
ber, and was preceded in some countries by a holy 
evening or Halloween. 1 At first it was the appearance 
of the Pleiades at sunset, later their culmination at mid- 
night, which determined the commencement of the 
year. According to the calendar of the Brahmans of 
Tirvalore the year began in November, and the first 
month was called after the Pleiades Cartiguey or Krit- 
tikas. The latter name Weber has shown to mean ' the 
associates,' those who are bound together, the heap, 
whilst the Hebrew word for the Pleiades, Kimah, has 
exactly the same meaning. Also, the first of the Naxa- 
tras, of the stellar houses or stations of the moon, was 
marked by the Pleiades. 

This Indian year, determined by the Pleiades, began 
with the 17th of November, approximative^ at the time 
of the Pleiades culminating at midnight, and this com- 
mencement of the year was celebrated by the Hindu 
Durga, a festival of the dead. Mr. Haliburton has 

1 Haliburton, New Materials for the History of Man, partly quoted by 
Professor Piazzi Smyth, and more fully examined and explained in Astro- 
nomical Myths, pp. 111-137, by the Rev. T. F. Blake. Comp. E. v. Bunsen, 
J>ie Plejaden und der Thierkreis, oder das Geheimmss der Symbole, 


shown that on the 17th of November, or Atliyr — the 
Athyr of the Egyptians and Atauria of the Arabs — the 
three days' feast of the Isia took place, which culminated 
in the finding of Osiris, the lord of tombs, evidently 
contemporaneously with the culmination of the Pleiades, 
at midnight. It was on that same day, in the second 
month of the Jewish year, which corresponds with our 
November, that Noah shut himself up in the ark, 
according to Genesis ; that is, on the same day when 
the image of Osiris was by the priests shut up in a 
sacred coffer or ark. According to Greswell, this new 
year's commemoration on the 17th of November ob- 
tained among the Indians in the earliest times to which 
Indian calendars can be traced back. It is sufficient for 
our argument, that its commencement can be proved 
long before the birth of Gautama-Buddha. 

If the 17th of November was New Year's-day, the 
second month commenced on the 17th of December, 
and ' the eighth day,' Buddha's birthday, was the 25th 
of December, the sun's annual birthday, when the 
power of the sun ceases to decrease and again begins to 
increase. 1 The text in Buddhistic writings we are con- 
sidering presupposes the commencement of the year on 
the 17th of November, and thus points to the 25th of 
December. This is confirmed by another statement 
in the same scripture. At the time of Buddha's birth, 
' the asterism Chin was passing and the asterism Koh 
was coining on.' Evidently this refers to the contempo- 
raneous rising and setting of certain stars on opposite 
sides of the horizon, In the assumed but uncertain 

1 According to the Christian calendar the birthday of John the Baptist 
is on the day of the summer solstice, when the sun begins to decrease. The 
words attributed to him in the Fourth Gospel, that he must decrease and 
Jesus increase, may be referred to this connection of the respective birth- 
days of John and of Jesus with the summer and the winter solstice. As there 
are six months between this change in the sun's position, so, according to 
the Gospel after Luke, the Baptist was exactly six months younger than 
Jesus. (Luke i. 24.) " 


year of Buddha's birth, 625 B.C., in the latitude of 
Benares, on the 25th of December, and at midnight, 
when according to prophecies the birth of the Anointed 
One was expected, ' the point of the ecliptic rising 
above the horizon was very close to the star X Virginis, 
whilst the stars a and f of this sign had already risen 
some distance. At this time the point of the ecliptic 
setting was in Aries, nearly in the same longitude as 
Hamal, a Arietis, the nearest visible star being /x Ceti.' 
The whole of Shin (Chin) had set at that hour in lati- 
tude 25°. Pisces had also entirely set; and the lunar 
mansion immediately above the western horizon was the 
one numbered 16 in Williams's list (Sen or Sin P). 1 It 
would seem, therefore, that this asterism Sen was the 
one meant in one Buddhist record, where it is called 
Chin. On this supposition the two asterisms mentioned 
as coming and going at the time of Buddha's birth 
would both be correctly referred to. But it is enough 
for our argument that an asterism in Virgo is clearly 
stated as coming on or rising on the horizon at that 
time, for the sign of Virgo was certainly rising on the 
eastern horizon at midnight on the 25th of December in 
the year 625 B.C., as seen in the latitude of Buddha's 
birthplace. The position of the sphere would not be 
materially altered in any of the possible other dates of 
Buddha's birth. 

Thus it is not proved that Gautama-Buddha was 
really born on the 25th of December, or rather at mid- 
night on the 24th, at the dawn (Maya) of the first day 
of the new solar year ; but it is proved, that the birth 
of the Angel-Messiah, whose symbol was the Sun, was 
expected and asserted to have actually taken place at 
this time, that is, on the eighth day of the second 
month of the year which was computed to begin on the 
17th of November. 

1 Kindly communicated by Mr. Proctor. See Williams's Map of Chinese 


Buddhistic records imply that Buddha was born at 
the time of the sun's annual birthday, of its entry into 
the sign of the winter solstice, when its apparent evolu- 
tion round the earth re-commences. The Cosmical was 
regarded as the symbol of the Ethical, the sun as the 
symbol of divine light, of which Gautama the enlightened 
was believed to be a chosen instrument. The solar 
Messianic symbol is thus proved to be more ancient 
than the time of Buddha's birth. The sun was the 
symbol of Gautama-Buddha and of Jesus Christ, who 
is described as ' the sun of righteousness ' and as ' the 
day-spring from on high.' This common symbolism 
may help to explain several parallels in Buddhistic and 
in Christian records. Here we have only to point out, 
that as on the transmitted day of Buddha's birth, so on 
Christmas-day the constellation of the sphere rising on 
the Eastern horizon is that of the Virgin, represented 
as holding the new-born Sun-God in her arms, and fol- 
lowed by the Serpent, who aims at her heel and almost 
touches it with its open mouth. The symbolism of the 
sphere on Christmas-day points to Isis with her infant 
Horus ; to the virgin Maya with her infant Buddha ; and 
to the Virgin Mary with her infant Jesus, described in 
the Apocalypse of John as persecuted by the old ser- 
pent, the Devil. 

Are these and other similar coincidences a mere 
chance, or have the respective traditions originated in a 
common source, and is that source a Divine Eeve- 
lation ? 

The Angel who is to become Buddha. 

We have shown that among a certain circle of In- 
dians, prophecies were accredited which announced the 
incarnation of an Angel, called the Anointed or Messiah, 
who should bring to earth the Wisdom or Bod hi from 
above and establish the kingdom of heavenly truth and 
justice. He would be of royal descent, and genealogies 


would connect him with his ancestors. ' The Blessed 
One,' the ' God among Gods,' and the ' Saviour of the 
World,' was, according to Buddhistic records, incarnate 
by the Holy Ghost of the royal virgin Maya, and he was 
born on Christmas-day, the birthday of the sun, for 
which reason the sun became the symbol of Gautama- 

The angel, whose time of incarnation is astrono- 
mically fixed, knows by the position of the stars, that 
his time is come to descend to earth, as organ of 
Divine enlightenment, of the Wisdom from above, of 
the Tradition from beyond the Prashna Paramita. The 
Bodhisatva, or next candidate for the Buddha dignity, 
the Tathagatha, He that should come, has fulfilled his 
years in the heavenly dwelling-place as Deva or Spirit, 
the Kung-teng, the Anointed or Messiah, is about to be 
born in the flesh. Sadness prevails among his fellow- 
spirits, because of his approaching departure. One of 
his companions is consoled by the consideration, that 
they can attain the privilege of descending to the earth, 
in order to see the place where Buddha is to be born. 
Another expresses his wish that his years in the place 
he inhabits were passed, so that he might be born with 
him on earth. Again another spirit says : ' Let not 
your heart be afraid, he will come again.' Finally, one 
of Buddha's associates addresses the departing one in 
these words : 'Maha Parusha,' great soul, or great Lord, 
' do not forget us.' In his parting address the heavenly 
Buddha says, that birth and death are the cause of all 
parting, that his fellow-spirits need not be sad about 
him. For in course of time he had become possessed 
of a certain condition or Karma, in consequence of his 
having ' always prepared his heart for the possession of 
the highest wisdom, by constant vows and prayers,' and 
that this Karma guards him from a long sojourn in the 

On the real meaning of ' Karma,' different opinions 


among the interpreters of Buddhism prevail. It has 
been defined as ' a connecting link, a bridge between 
one life and another,' and yet not as the soul, which 
Buddhism is held not to acknowledge. Karma is ex- 
plained to be the doctrine, that as soon as a sentient 
being dies, whether angel, man, or animal, a new being 
is produced in a more or less painful and material state 
of existence, according to the Karma, desert or merit, 
of the being who had died. Karma is a moral cause, 
and never dies. From one point of view Karma ' has 
much analogy with soul ; and from another it is a name 
given to the moral power working in the universe. 1 
We submit that this moral power must be identified 
witli ' the spiritual power ' or Maya, which is also called 
6 Holy Spirit.' It is this power in heaven and earth 
which is said to have guarded Buddha from a long 
sojourn in the world, and which enabled him to fix his 
heart on what is not material, and finally to enter 
Nirvana. Whether Karma be regarded as conscience, 
or as instinct, in either case it might be connected, more 
or less directly, with the ' Holy Spirit ' or ' Word,' through 
which, according to Iranian tradition, the highest God 
communicates his mysteries to reasonable beings in 
heaven and earth. 

4 This, his body,' which Buddha has ' not yet been 
able to cast off,' though in heaven, would be born in 
the world, but soon he would receive perfect liberation 
from all matter in the Nirvana. ' I now am about to 
assume a body (Shan-yeou), not for the pleasure of 
gaining wealth or enjoying the pleasures of sense, but 
I am about to descend and be born among men (to take 
" tli is one birth ") simply to give peace and rest to all 
flesh, and to remove all sorrow and grief from the 
world.' The body which Buddha, possessed in heaven 
before his incarnation he was then about ' to quit for 

1 Rhys Davids, Buddhism, 101-103, 150. 


ever.' But later recorded tradition implies, that after 
the incarnation Buddha would assume another body, 
the ' spotless and pure,' Dharmakaya, which, in ' the 
final resting-place of the spirit,' in the Nirvana he 
would possess under different circumstances, and ' long 
after ' the human body has passed away. In one of 
the ancient Gathas or hymns, ' the deliverance ' (in 
Nirvana) is connected with the obtaining of ' a body 
free from contamination,' that is, free from all material 
influences, a spiritual body. 1 

Nirvana is the Sun. 

Buddha is described as leaving the fourth heaven, 
Tiisita, but from this locality, as from all material 
heavens or Eupa, the highest of which is called 
Akanishta, is distinguished the Nirvana. We submit 
that the mysterious Nirvana or ' annihilation,' refers to 
the place where ' all matter ' is supposed to be anni- 
hilated, that is, to the Sun. 

According to Buddhist conception, within the circle 
of the soul's migrations from one material body to 
another, one and the same law rules, that is, the deeds 
of the past life of the soul in a material prison act 
upon another existence of the soul in the veil of 
matter. From this never-varying law of rewards and 
punishments, no escape for reasonable beings is possible ; 
except by continually fixing the mind and the heart on 
the final destruction of all material influences. These 
prevent the liberation of the soul from successive births 
and deaths, and hinder the entrance of the soul into 
Nirvana. The soul is the breath or spirit from the 
spiritual world, which is separated from the material 
world by a great gulf. The light from the spiritual 
world, from its centre, shines in a dark place, as the 

1 Rom. History, 26, 33, 34, 130, and Beal's Buddhist Pilgrims, 400 a.d. 
and 518 a.d. 


glory or Shechina, symbolised by the sun, shone in the 
darkness of the Holiest of the Holy. 

The Buddhists seem originally to have conceived the 
locality of Nirvana in a manner similar to the Christian's 
conception of God's abode, as a place where, as in the 
sun, there is ' neither variableness nor shadow of turn- 
ing.' The Nirvana seems to have been regarded as a 
locality which, like the sun, does not appear to revolve 
around other bodies. The Buddhists may be assumed 
to have regarded Nirvana as the non-material centre 
of the universe, and source of light. Since the orbit of 
bodies in space forms the basis of the doctrine of trans- 
migrations of souls, the sun, as the supposed immaterial 
centre of these bodies which appear to rotate round this 
luminary, could be regarded as the appropriate symbol 
of the Nirvana, ' the last resting-place of the spirit,' 
which has then been freed from the ever-returning cycles 
of birth and death, and returns to its home. 

Thus the idea would suggest itself to regard the sun 
as the purely spiritual and immaterial dwelling-place of 
the self-dependent, world-creating spirit, Isvara-Deva, to 
whom Buddha prayed with uplifted eyes. His system of 
morality, which he could not connect with the gods of the 
Brahmans, must have acknowledged a non-terrestrial, 
spiritual source of moral Providence, unknown to Brah- 
manism, at least as publically proclaimed. Gautama 
is recorded to have regarded the origin of the soul, 
which Brah 1 nanism vaguely connected with Brahma, as 
beyond human comprehension. But he cannot have 
separated the soul from the highest spirit, to whom he 
prayed. The spiritual body of the Arhats,of the righteous, 
or saints, is to be like the shining body of Brahma ; they 
shall shine like the sun when they have entered 

In the most ancient Buddhistic writings two essen- 
tially different explanations of the Nirvana are given. 
On the one side it is described as the end of all existence, 


even as the extinguishing of a flame, as a cessation of 
thought. But in other passages it is described as the 
place of peace, of an existence without births and 
deaths, as ' a place of repose,' to be enjoyed by the con- 
querors in the material world — -that is, as we may 
assume, by the souls who have conquered over matter, 
and who are to enjoy a non-material, a spiritual 
body. The Nirvana can only be reached by inward 
growth, by ' the path of wisdom ' ; to which way of 
everlasting life is opposed the way which leads to ' the 
power and dominion ' which the evil spirit, the god of 
the material world, exercises, and which is to be 
destroyed. From this it may be concluded, that 
Nirvana was connected with the kingdom of the good 
and bright spirit, with the abode of the self-dependent 
god, Isvara-Deva. 

Nirvana is the highest aim, the highest reward of 
the wandering soul, the place from whence it came and 
whither it returns, the place of the heavenly harvest, 
according to a simile of Gautama, to which we shall 
presently refer. In some of the most ancient Buddhist 
records, in the Jatakas or stories, in the Gathas or 
songs which Sakya is said to have recited, and which 
show some relations to the Gathas of Zoroaster in the 
Zendavesta, the Nirvana is described, though not exclu- 
sively of other views b as the final resting-place of 
spiritual beings. Buddha is recorded to have said that 
he saw individuals in Nirvana, and many holy men are 
mentioned by name ' who entered into the brightness of 
the sun, and attained the straight path.' Their desire 
is fulfilled, and they ' abide for ever in the true eternal 
law ' ; they dwell in ' the only truly great one of the 
three worlds.' The ' condition of Nirvana,' to be desired 
above all things, is contrasted to ' all earthly things,' 
which are ' perishable.' The narrow path leads to ' the 
shore of Nirvana,' to 'the ever constant condition,' to 
* the nectar of true religion,' to immortality. Nirvana 


is identified with ' the opening of the pure ways of 
heaven,' of the ' gates of eternal life/ and is actually 
called the sun, and ' the centre of the supernatural 
light.' l Thus the immortality of the soul in Nirvana is 
clearly acknowledged. Nirvana is the place of the in- 
gathering, the heavenly garner for the ripened fruit 
sown in the material world : it is the sun as the region 
of eternal life. 

The explanation of Nirvana as the sun is confirmed 
by the presumable identity of the sun-god Abidlia with 
the highest spirit, Isvara-Deva, who thrones in Nirvana, 
and also by the direct connection of Buddha with Nirvana 
as well as with the sun. The sun is the symbol of Buddha, 
who is represented as a ram or lamb — that is, as the 
stellar symbol of the spring-equinox in his time, as the 
Sun in Aries. This interpretation is all the more ad- 
missible, as we have proved that, according to Buddhistic 
records, Gautama-Buddha's birth was expected, and had 
taken place, on the sun's annual birthday. Again, the 
connection of the locality of Nirvana, with the sun is 
confirmed by what seems to have been the aboriginal 
meaning of the ' four paths ' which lead to Nirvana, and 
which we may now connect with the ' four kings ' and 
the four cardinal points of the Zodiac, with ' the four 
quarters of the world,' towards each of which the new- 
born Gautama-Buddha is said to have advanced seven 
steps. Buddhists describe Abidha as the god of light 
(of the sun), as surrounded by four mysterious beings, 
which form a striking analogy to the four cherubim 
and four beasts of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures. 

The enemy of the sun-god Abidlia is the ■ king of 
death ' and the dwelling-place of Abidha, the king of 
life, is Nirvana, from which it follows that the sun 
was by Buddhists identified witli Nirvana. In this 
locality there is neither darkness nor death : ' To be 

1 Romantic History, 9, 121, 130, 251. 253, 199, 200 > 208, 212, 215, 217; 
comp. 175, 219, 225. 


and not to be, how can this be united in One, how can 
this be Nirvana ? These two conditions have nothing in 
common ; can darkness and light be united ? ' As in 
the sun, so in Nirvana there is no darkness, no death. 
As the snn was regarded to be the source of the vital 
and enlightening spiritual power and of the highest 
wisdom, as throne of the god of light, so it is the long- 
ing of all sons of the Wisdom from above, of the Bodhi 
or spiritual power, of the Maya or Brahm, whose chief 
organ Gautama was, to reach 4 the way and the place ' 
into which ' all Bnddhas ' have entered. 1 

At the same time the word ' Nirvana ' is used to 
describe a spiritual condition, a ' condition of moral 
rest,' of which Gautama had received a foretaste whilst 
on earth, since he possessed the Prashna Paramita, the 
Wisdom or Bodhi, the Tradition ' from beyond.' For 
this reason he was ' in possession of complete spiritual 
life,' being * perfected,' and having, in a spiritual sense, 
' reached Nirvana.' His flesh was, therefore, not at 
enmity with the spirit within the same ; and because 
the opposing principle in himself had been overcome 
by the required free determination of his will, therefore 
his liberation from the circle of birth and death took 
place, and s through eternity ' he was to receive no 
more ' migratory existence,' but the enduring existence, 
eternal life in Nirvana. It follows from these and 
similar passages that even the personal existence in 
the flesh did not prevent Gautama entering, during his 
sojourn on earth, into that spiritual condition which in 
the highest and abiding sense was connected with 
Nirvana as the ' centre of supernatural light ' and the 
* brightness of the sun.' If therefore in isolated pas- 
sages Gautama is recorded to have said that after the 

1 Conip. Beal, Congress of Orientalists, 1874, p. 155; Horn. Hist. 251. 
Abidlia seems to be only another name for Amitlmba, the god of boundless 
light, said by Northern Buddhists to inhabit the Paradise of the West, and 
for Adi-Buddha of the Nepaulese (Eitel, Buddhism, second edition, 08 f., 


birth of Bodhi in him he at once obtained deliverance, 
and that hereafter there would be ' no more individual 
existence,' no more ' bhava,' this expression, the exact 
meaning of which is doubtful, can only be referred to 
his body in the flesh, as the last of material bodies. 
From the ' bhava ' must be distinguished the spotless 
and pure ' dharmakaya/ the spiritual body, in ' the final 
resting-place of the spirit,' in Nirvana. This celestial 
body the Buddhist expects to possess under different 
circumstances, long after ' the human body ' has passed 
away, after the end of the soul's transmigrations, which 
only in the exceptional cases of incarnate angels like 
Buddha were regarded as having come to an end with 
the life on earth. The body in the flesh was regarded 
by Gautama, according to the texts, as one of five' 
finite existences, the five Skhandha, of which he is 
recorded to have said ; ' It is impossible to say that 
either of these is " I," that is atta or atma, the " self," 
which being in its germ of heavenly origin, cannot be 
identified with any one of the soul's material embodi- 
ments. The soul of man is intended finally to be 
in a body like that of Gautama, which is described 
as resembling " the bright body " of Brahma, " a body 
free from contamination," and which alone can " cross 
over to the shore " of Nirvana, which body alone can 
reach the "heavenly land of the Arhats," and the 
" lake of Ambrosia which washes away all sin/' ' 1 

To be like Gautama is to reach the ideal which has 
been set to humanity, and to be like God. Salvation does 
not depend on any outward act ; but on a change or re- 
newal of the mind, on a reform of the inner nature, on 
faith in the innate guiding power of God, of which the 
celestial Buddha incarnated in Gautama was held to be 
the highest organ. The saving faith, therefore, was 
brought by and centred in the incarnate Angel-Messiah, 
the Saviour of the world. Thus also the Hindus held, 

1 Romantic History, 253-25G, 284, 108, 77; Rhys Davids, I.e., 148. 


certainly those of later times, that their ancient belief 
in the doctrine of ' salvation by faith ' or 'bhakti' centred 
in the God-man, Krishna, one of the incarnations of 
the Deity. Salvation is by faith, and faith comes by the 
Maya, the Spirit or Word of God, of which Buddha, the 
Angel-Messiah, was regarded as the divinely chosen and 
incarnate messenger, the vicar of God, and God himself 
on earth. 1 

Conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Maya. 

The incarnation of the Angel destined to become 
Buddha took place in a spiritual manner. The ele- 
phant is the symbol, as of the sun, so of power 
and wisdom; and Buddha, symbolised by the sun, 
was considered the organ of divine 'power and 
wisdom,' as he is called in the 'Tikas.' For these 
reasons Buddha is described by Buddhistic legends as 
having descended from heaven in the form of an 
elephant to the place where the virgin Maya was. But 
according to Chinese-Buddhistic writings, it was the 
' Holy Ghost,' or ' Shing-Shin,' which descended on the 
virgin Maya. The effect produced by this miracle is 
thus summed up in the most ancient Chinese life of 
Buddha which we at present possess; translated be- 
tween a.d. 25 and 190: 'If the child born from this 
conception be induced to lead a secular life, he shall 
become a universal monarch ; but if he leave his home 
and become a religious person, then he shall become 
Buddha, and shall save the world.' 2 

Gautama had himself chosen Maya for his mother 
among the daughters of men, when in the fourth 
heaven lie had seen, guided by astronomical signs, 

1 Monier Williams, Hinduism, 115, 136, 216-209. The Maya, or Holy 
Ghost of the Buddhists may be safely identified as with the Brahm, so with 
the original eternal element or Prakriti, from which the world proceeded 
according to the system of Sankhya, well known to Gautama. 

2 Communicated by Prof. Beal ; comp. Beal, THpitaka, 160. 



by a Messianic star, that the time for his incarnation 
had come. Having seen the Messianic constellation, the 
Angel-Messiah at once chose his parents in the flesh. 
His choice fell on the King of Kapilavastu and his 
virgin-bride Maya or Mayadevi. She was so called 
after Maya, the spiritual, creative and enlightening 
power of Indian tradition, after the Bodhi or Wisdom 
from above, the power, word, or spirit, the Brahm of 
the highest God. This power of the Highest, 'the 
Holy Ghost,' was to surround her, and thus ' the holy 
mother' was to give birth to ' the holy son.' 

The virgin Queen of Kapilavastu, in the tenth 
month after her heavenly conception, was on a journey 
to her father, called Supra-Buddha-Grihapati, living in 
the city of Devadaho, and she had reached the Lumbini 
Garden, but according to other accounts she was only 
halfway in a forest, where she had alighted in an inn, 
when Buddha was born. The birth took place under 
' two golden trees — under the Bodhi-tree, Palasa, the 
acacia, originally the fig-tree, symbol of knowledge, 
and under the A^oka-tree, the tree of life. Among the 
thirty-two sighs which were to be fulfilled by the 
mother of the expected Messiah, the fifth sign was 
recorded to be, that she would be on a journey at the 
time of her childbirth. 1 Resting under the Palasa-tree, 
Maya was thus addressed by 'the heavenly women' 
who surrounded her : * The Queen now brings forth the 
child, able to divide the wheel of life and death; 2 in 

1 The thirty-two signs refer to thirty-two deities, headed by Indra, who 
is the thirty-third, that is eight Vasaa, eleven Rudras, twelve Adityas, and 
two Aswins. There were also eighty signs of secondary importance. The 
number thirty-two represents the half of the number sixty-four, which, 
together with the holy number eight, constituted the holy numbers of 
Chinese tradition before the time of Confucius and Buddha. These num- 
bers added together represented the ancient astronomical cycle of seventy- 
two, based on the observation, which was not quite correct till much later, 
that in seventy-two solar years the precession amounts to one day. (Oomp. 
E. v. Bunsen, Die Plejaden mid der Thierkreis.) 

2 That is able by a miracle to interrupt the continuous cycle of births 
and deaths, to enter Nirvana, the sun, which seems to pass by the twelve 
zodiacal Nidanas. 


heaven and earth no teacher can equal him; able to 
deliver both Devas and men from every kind of sorrow : 
let not the Queen be distressed, we are here to support 
her.' Thereupon Bodhisatwa, perceiving his mother 
Maya standing on the ground, with a branch of the 
tree in her hand, 'with conscious mind, arose from his 
seat and was born.' The attending spirits exclaimed : 
'All joy be to you, Queen Maya, rejoice and be glad, 
for this child you have borne is holy.' He forthwith 
'walked seven steps towards each quarter of the 
horizon, and, looking first to the East, he pronounced 
the words of the Gath&: 'In all the world I am the 
very chief, from this day forth my births are finished.' 

The ' Saviour of the world,' or ' the Blessed One of 
the world,' the Bhagavat, the ' only begotten ' Bodhi- 
satwa, is born in the presence of the highest God, of 
Indra, the King of kings, and of Brahma. This event 
is attested by miracles. Whilst ' the sun and moon are 
darkened and deprived of their light,' there is 'a divine 
light diffused round his person,' so that the Queen's son 
was ' heralded into the world by a supernatural light.' 
Then ' the Eishis and Devas who dwelt on earth 
exclaimed with great joy : This day Buddha is born 
for the good of men, to dispel the darkness of their 
ignorance. Then the four heavenly kings took up the 
strain and said : Now because Bodhisatwa is born, to 
give joy and bring peace to the world, therefore is 
there this brightness. Then the gods of the thirty- 
three heavens took up the burthen of the strain, and 
the Yama Devas and the Tusita Devas, and so forth, 
through all the heavens of the Kama, Eupa, and Arupa 
worlds, even up to the Akanishta heavens, all the 
Devas joined in this song and said : To-day Bodhisatwa 
is born on earth, to give joy and peace to men and 
Devas, to shed light in the dark places, and to give 
sight to the blind.' l 

1 Romantic History, 43-56. 

d 2 


A holy One, a Bishi, called Asita or Kala, the ' Black 
One,' dwelling at peace above the thirty-three heavens,' 
seeing celestial signs, and hearing the celestial song, 
descended to the grove, ' where he usually dwelt on 
earth.' But, according to other accounts, he was a 
Tapaso or ascetic, from the Himalaya, called Kala- 
devalo, which name corresponds with that of Asita. 
He gets to Kapilavastu, where Maya tries to make the 
child bow its head in reverence towards the feet of Asita. 
But the child, ' by his spiritual power, turned himself 
round in his mother's arms, and presented his feet 
towards the Bishi, who begged to worship his feet.' 
Then Asita, unbearing his right shoulder and bending 
his right knee to the ground, took the child in his 
arms, and, returning to his seat, rested on his knees. 
He declared, that ' with the deepest reverence of body 
and mind,' he took refuge in and submitted to the 
child. ' Doubtless this child by his Divine wisdom, is 
completely acquainted with all events, past and future, 
and will therefore be able to preach the law,' after 
having become 'completely inspired,' that is, after 
thirty-five years. Asita, being of an advanced age, 
deplores that he is too old to hear himself the Messianic 
proclamation of the pure law. He returns, rejoicing, to 
his mountain-home, for his eyes have seen the promised 
and expected ' Saviour.' i 

Maya's death took place on the seventh day after 
the child's birth, when she was ' translated at once ' to 
heaven, whence she occasionally descends to comfort 
men. The holy son is placed under the care of a 
chosen stepmother, Maha-Prajapati, the virgin's son 
having neither brothers nor sisters. ' The royal prince's 

1 Romanic History, 54-62. The paintings in the Cave of Ajunta repre- 
sent Asita with the child in his arms. It is curious, that whilst this Simeon 
of the Buddhists is called the Black, a Simon-Niger is mentioned in the 
Acts among the prophets of the Antiochian Church, which we shall connect 
with Essenes, as these with Buddhists. 


foster-mother sedulously attended him without inter- 
mission, as the sun attends on the moon during the first 
portion of each month, till the moon arrives at its 
fulness. So the child gradually waxed and increased 
in strength ; as the shoot of the Nyagrodha-tree gradually 
increases in size, well planted in the earth, till itself 
becomes a great tree, thus did the child day by day 
increase, and lacked nothing.' This tradition seems to 
be very old, as Buddha is compared to the growing 
moon, 1 not to the sun growing in strength, the birthday 
of which is described, perhaps by relatively later 
tradition, as the birthday of Buddha. When the sun 
had become Buddha's symbol, and when the tradition 
about his life on earth referred to him as 'the glory of 
the newly risen sun,' the mother's symbol must have 
been changed from the moon to the sun. 2 

Presentation in the Temple and Temptation in the 

Up to his eighth year the prince lives in the royal 
palace, without receiving any tuition, but from the 
eighth to the twelfth year masters are given him. When 
twelve years old, the child is presented in the temple, 
on which occasion forthwith all statues rise and throw 
themselves at his feet, even the statues of Indra and 
Brahma. 3 ' He explains and asks learned questions ; 
he excels all those who enter into competition with 
him.' Yet he waits till he has reached his thirtieth 
year before teaching in public surrounded by disciples. 

1 According to one of the sacred histories, or Itihasas, in the Mahabharata, 
a certain Buddha is called Son of the Moon, and his son was Paruravas, who 
introduced the three fires of sacrifice, according to the Rig-Veda, (Duncker, 
ii. 35). The holy seventh days of the Buddhists, the Uposatha, refer to 
the moon, and are the four days in the lunar month when the moon is full, 
or new, or halfway between the two. (Rhys Davids, I.e. 140.) 

2 Comp. the connection of the moon with the child's mother in the Apoca-. 
lypse of John, 

3 This latter feature is not recorded in the Lalita- Vistara, 


' Seeing all flesh weighed down by sorrow, oppressed 
by the weight of false teaching and heretical beliefs, 
he thought, how difficult to release them by declaring 
this inscrutable law of mine ! thinking thus, he desired 
to remain as a solitary hermit (aranya).' According to 
another account, he left the palace when twenty-eight 
years old, spent seven years in the wilderness, and not 
till his thirty-fifth year, having then learnt perfect wis- 
dom, as Asita predicted, did he become a public teacher. 
' The child of heavenly birth is thoroughly acquainted 
with the human heart,' he has ' arrived at perfect 
righteousness,' and can now fulfil his ' destiny,' which 
is ' to establish the kingdom of the highest truth upon 
earth,' that is, ' the kingdom of righteousness.' Buddha 
has come - to deliver man from doubt and fear,' and he 
is recorded to have said : ' My heart enlightened, I 
desire to enlighten others.' l 

It was at Eajagraha, near Patna, and at Savastu 
that Gautama began publicly to teach. During the 
rainy season he withdrew with his disciples to the 
Gardens of Kalanda and of Jeta, and he seems generally 
to have avoided the cities, The number of his disciples 
had soon risen to sixty, and he sent them in different 
directions to preach. Before Gautama can fulfil his 
desire ' to open the gates of everlasting life,' to prepare 
men for immortality, he must destroy death by con- 
quering over the God of death, Gautama is now able 
to withstand, in the wilderness among beasts of prey, 
the attack and 'temptation' of Mara, 'the god of death.' 
He is also called 'king of the world of sin,' the ruler 
in 'hell.' Gautama's antagonist or Satan, Mara, 'trans- 
formed ' himself (appeared in the air), and promised 
Buddha the rule of the world (in seven days), but ' the 
Holy One ' said to the devil : ' Thou, although supreme 
in the world of desire, hast no authority or power in 
the spiritual world ; thou art acquainted only with the 

1 Romantic History, 63, 04, 0,7, 71, 72, 242, 142, 154, 212, 215. 


wretched beings in hell : but I belong not to either of 
the three material worlds. It is I who hereafter will 
destroy thine abode, oil Mara, and wrest from you your 
power and your dominion. . . . Not long hence I shall 
attain the highest wisdom, I shall soon become Buddha, 
. . . my helpers are the Devas of the pure abodes, 
my sword is Wisdom ... I scorn the lie.' Having 
'defeated and overpowered all the evil influences and 
devices of Mara and his companions,' eight guardian- 
angels ' encouraged and comforted ' the Blessed One 
in various ways. Hereupon supernatural effects were 
witnessed in heaven and earth. ' There was no ill 
feeling or hatred in the hearts of men, but whatever 
want there was, whether of food or drink or raiment, 
was at once supplied ; the blind received their sight, 
the deaf heard, and the dumb spake ; those who were 
bound in hell were released, and every kind of being — 
beasts, demons, and all created things — found peace 
and rest.' * 

This wicked Mara who opposes Gautama is by 
Buddhist legends distinguished from the good serpent 
Naga, probably the fire-spirit, symbolised by the 
serpent-formed lightning, a spirit who does Buddha no 
harm, and who is present at his baptism. But we may 
safely assume that the Initiated did connect Mara, the 
devil, with the symbol of an evil serpent, with an evil 
Naga. For mention is made of a Naga or serpent with 
seven heads ; and a ' poisonous serpent ' or dragon, 
whom nothing but ' the fire-spirit ' could subdue, 
threatens ' with his flames ' Gautama's life. The latter 
is reported to have said : ' If the place were full of 
fiery serpents, they could not hurt one hair of my 
body, how much less this one evil creature.' Again, 
Gautama is represented, like Siva, sitting on a serpent, 
as if its conqueror. Among his followers Mara desig- 
nates some as ' my army of warriors,' and literally as 

1 Romantic History, 99-227. 


' the Nagas (serpents), each riding on a pitch-black 
cloud and launching forth the fiery lightnings.' Like 
as the sun gains the victory over the dark cloud 
with its serpent-formed lightning, so Gautama-Buddha, 
whose symbol is the sun, gains the victory over his 
antagonist Mara, who is followed by fiery serpents, and 
who is himself described as a poisonous serpent. It is 
implied that Gautama is the organ of the fire-spirit, 
who can conquer this serpent. Buddha is sometimes 
represented as a ram or lamb, and since the constellation 
of the Serpent is placed on the sphere opposite to 
Aries, the spring-equinoctial sign, at the rising of which 
Buddha was born, we may assert, that Mara, the devil, 
is identified, at least connected with the evil Naga, the 
poisonous serpent. 1 It may now be regarded as highly 
probable, that the Buddhists, like the Egyptians and 
the tradition in the Apocrypha of the Septuagint, dis- 
tinguished a good serpent from an evil one. The good 
serpent was on the Nile connected with the solar disc ; 
but the fire, which had been the earlier symbol of this 
serpent, was referred to lightning. 

The Messiah. 

The appearance of Gautama is described as ' full of 
grace,' his body as surrounded with a ' glory ' similar 
to the sun ; and in the representations of this glory fiery 
tongues are discernible, whilst two men are placed near 
him, one to his right hand, the other to his left. Before 
Ananda's conversion, the disciples of Gautama are de- 
scribed as sitting on his right hand and on his left. 
Buddha is represented as a ram or lamb, which symbol 
as we have seen, refers to the sun in the sign of Aries. 
Buddha is never represented as a bull, like Mithras and 

1 Romantic History, 219, 220. The Hebrew word Nachash, ' serpent/ is 
connected with Naga. All heroes of light were opposed by heroes of dark- 
ness, symbolised by serpents (see following Chapter). 


the more ancient solar heroes of the time when 
Taurus was the spring-equinoctial sign. He is also 
called * the lion from the tribe of Sakya,' and ' un- 
equalled among those born of women.' The ' heaven- 
descended mortal,' full of grace, brings ' truth ' to the 
earth, ' the incomparable truth,' that is, ' the way of 
life' and of 'immortality.' At no time Buddha received 
this knowledge ' from a human source,' that is, from 
flesh and blood. His source was ( the power of his 
Divine wisdom,' the spiritual power or Maya, which he 
already possessed before his incarnation. It was by 
this divine power, which is also called ' the Holy Ghost,' 
that he became 'the Saviour,' the ' Kung-teng,' the 
Anointed or Messiah, to whom prophecies had pointed. 
Buddha was regarded as the supernatural light of the 
world ; and this world to which he came was his own, 
his possession, for he is styled : ' the Lord of the world.' x 
As Gautama was born under the two trees which 
symbolise knowledge and life, so, according to Bud- 
dhistic legends, the evil and the good in man are 
symbolised by trees. The object of man's life ought to 
be to destroy ' the tree of evil ' in himself, so that his 
' tree of good ' may grow up and bear fruit. This can 
only be accomplished by prayer and humility, which 
raise man to the height of < the unknown' — of the ' san- 
sarum dalain,' to the knowledge of the ' sansara.' Man 
must take an active part in the redemption of his soul, 
yet ' the redemption comes not from ourselves, but from 
causes which are independent of us.' 2 Although the 
actions in previous existences of the soul were held to 
accelerate or retard this redemption, the latter must 
have been believed to be also dependent on the influences 
of higher but cognate spirits, and, above all, on the 
highest, the self-dependent Spirit. This is proved by 
the transmitted story of Gautama's water-baptism. 

1 Romantic History, 169, 16, 34, 49, 53, 197, 248, 241, 243, 249, 296. 

2 Bastian, Reisen in China, ' Anhangj' Romantic History, 167. 


Immediately after his birth, spirits descend and bring 
water to wash the holy child, a transmitted occurrence, 
which seems by Buddhists to have been regarded 
as a supernatural act of purification. But the real 
symbol of the sanctity which Gautama was to attain, 
the outward sign of the inward grace, was his water- 
baptism. We shall see that the latter preceded, and was 
probably regarded as a symbol of, his 'fire-baptism.' 
The water-baptism of Gautama has not been sufficiently 
established hitherto. The Buddhists in Thibet have a 
water-baptism, Tuisol, preceded by confession of sins ; 
but this rite might not have been sanctioned by Buddha. 
In a Chinese life of Buddha we read that, ' living at 
Vaisali, Buddha delivered the baptism which rescues 
from life and death, and confers salvation.' This state- 
ment may have been connected with the account of 
Gautama's crossing the river Nairanyana. Before step- 
ping into the water, he expressed his resolution to follow 
in the footsteps of all the Budclhas, to reach ' the other 
shore,' to ' procure salvation for all men and conduct 
them to the other shore,' 1 that is, to the locality 
of Nirvana, to ' the heavenly country,' where all the 
Budclhas are, to the sun. A striking parallel must here 
be pointed out. Israel's crossing of the Eed Sea was 
by Paul regarded as the baptism of Israel's fathers ; and, 
in harmony with Paulinic allegories, Israel's crossing of 
Jordan to reach the promised land has by Bunyan been 
described as a type of entering the heavenly land, Jeru- 
salem which is above, with its twelve gates, 2 and the 
tree of life, where the light shines as the sun. Even in 
the terrestrial type of the heavenly Jerusalem, that is, in 
Zion, which the Babylonian Isaiah had called Beulah, 
Bunyan describes the sun as shining day and night. 
' Christian ' attempts, with much hesitation, to proceed to 

1 Beal, Rom. Hist., 194-198 ; ScHagintweit, Buddhism in Thibet ; 
Asiatic Journ., xx. 172. 

2 Twelve solar mansions, or signs of the Zodiac ; conip. Ernst von 
Bunsen, Das Symbol des Kreuzes bet alien Nationen. 


the other shore, but he is unable to cross the river 
unaided. As in Isaiah the Lord is recorded to have 
said, ' When thou passest through the waters I will be 
with thee,' and as Christ, the Angel of God, was with 
the Israelites when they crossed the Eed Sea, so Jesus 
Christ, the Wisdom of God, assists ; Christian ' in cross- 
ing the river. 1 

Gautama is described as crossing a certain stream in 
order, to reach the land beyond, Nirvana with the Bodhi- 
tree, the tree of knowledge or tree of life. Having 
entered the river and bathed, whilst spirits ' showered 
down upon him every kind of flower and perfume, he 
attempted to proceed to the other shore of the river,' 
but from want of strength after his six years' penance, 
'he was unable to reach the opposite bank.' Then the 
spirit of a ' certain great tree,' of the Bodhi-tree or tree 
of knowledge, which is also the tree of life, and which 
was in the land beyond, or heavenly land, in Nirvana, 
the sun, this Divine spirit, with outstretched arms, 
assisted Gautama, and enabled him ' to reach the shore 
in safety.' Hereupon Gautama, as all Buddhas before 
him had done after crossing the holy stream, advanced 
to the Bodhi-tree, and thus reached ' supreme wisdom ' ; 
he became ' a perfect Buddha,' and entered life im- 
mortal. 2 

1 Bunyan's Pilgrim 's Process-, comp. 1 Cor. x. 1-4; Is. xliii. 2; 
lxii. 4. 

2 The basis of this symbolism about crossing a stream which leads to the 
tree of life and immortality, seems to have been the Egyptian tradition, of 
Eastern origin, about Osiris, who is represented with the tree of life before 
him, and whose body had been cut up into fourteen parts. The Lord of the 
tombs was symbolized by the setting sun, but previously by the mysterious 
Pleiades, passing through the stream of the lower world. Thus he passed by 
the fourteen invisible lunar asterisms in order to rise again in the East, at 
the end of the supposed stream of death, or the Lethe-river of later tradi- 
tions, the waters of which are drunk by the souls of the departed before 
entering Elysium. Mr. R. Haliburton, of Nova Scotia, is prepared to prove 
that Paradise was supposed to be in the ' land of the Pleiades/ in which 
was supposed to grow ' the tree of life.' Since the solar symbolism took the 
place of that of the Pleiades, our interpretation of Nirvana with its tree of 
life, as the sun, is thus confirmed. The most ancient (Egyptian) representa- 


The Spirit of the tree of knowledge, or Wisdom, 
who, with Indra, the highest God, is present at the 
water-baptism of Gautama, is the third person of the 
Buddhistic trias. 1 That spirit is identified by Buddhists 
with the fire-spirit, the good Naga or serpent of Bud- 
dhistic tradition, as likewise with the Wisdom or Word 
of God, ' the Saviour,' of whom the Book of Wisdom (by 
Philo ?) states that it was symbolised by the brazen or 
rather fiery serpent which Moses set up in the wilderness 
as a sign of salvation, and with which, in the Fourth 
Gospel, Jesus Christ, ' the Wisdom of God,' is identified. 3 
As at the recorded water-baptism of Gautama-Buddha, 
so at the recorded water-baptism of Jesus Christ, that is, 
of the personified Wisdom of God, of the spiritual Eock 
which followed the Israelites when they passed through 
the sea and were ' baptised unto Moses,' the highest 
God (Indra, Jehovah) and the Spirit of God were 
present, 3 that is, not only the highest God, but also ' the 
Holy Ghost,' through whom the incarnation of Gautama- 
Buddha and of Jesus Christ is recorded to have been 
brought about, by the descent of that Divine power 
upon the two virgins, Maya and Mary. 

tion of the tree of life (about B.C. 1400), is a palm, in Greek phoinix (Job 
xxix. 18; Ps. xcii. 13), and Herodotus called the Egyptian pi-enech, which 
means seon, the phoenix, which he described as like an eagle. It is, we 
suggest, the eagle on the back of the apis, that is, of Taurus with the 
Pleiades, from whence, that is from the Matarii, the Matarisvan or 
messenger of Agni brought down the fire, according to Mr. Ilaliburtoivs dis- 
covery. (Ernst von Bunsen, Die Plejaden unci der Thierkreis, 43-47, 95- 

1 In the Buddhistic Trinity-symbol the tree represents the third link, 
the Holy Spirit or Wisdom of God, the Sophia Achamoth of the Gnostics. 
Pointed out by Mr. A. Lillie. 

2 Wisd. ix. 17 ; vii. 27 ; xvi. 6, 7, 12 ; xviii. 15 : comp. Ecclus. xxiv. ; 
Prov. viii. 22, 31, and JEssenic Doctrines in the Septuagint, chapter iv. 

3 The symbol of the Spirit of God was the dove, in Greek, peleia 
(Pleiades?), and the Samaritans had a brazen fiery dove, instead of the 
brazen fiery serpent. Both referred to fire, the symbol of the Holy Ghost, 
and the latter is referred to Christ. Birds are connected with the Egyptian 
representations of the tree of life, and thus with fire, a very ancient symbol 
lism. (Kuhn, Die fTerabkunft cles Feuevs.) 


Gautama, ' the completely enlightened One,' the 
' Omniscient,' is recorded to have said that he possessed 
* perfect inspiration,' that he had reached that point of 
development which enabled him to ' see clearly immor- 
tality, the way which leads to immortality,' that is, ' the 
opened gates of Nom.' l These we may identify with 
' the straight path ' which leads to Nirvana, to the tree 
of life, and thus to immortality. By entering these 
gates man enters into the world of miracles, and is 
transformed into a higher being. 

On one occasion, towards the end of his life on 
earth, Gautama is reported to have been transfigured 
or ' baptized with fire.' When on a mountain in Ceylon, 
suddenly a flame of light descended upon him and 
encircled the crown of his head with a circle of light. 
The mount is called Pandava, or yellow-white colour. 
It is said that ' the glory of his person shone forth with 
double power,' that his body was ' glorious as a bright 
golden image,' that he ' shone as the brightness of the 
sun and moon,' that bystanders expressed their opinion, 
that he could not be an ' every-day person,' nor ' a 
mortal man,' and that his body was divided into three 
parts, from each of which a ray of light issued forth. 2 

Gautama-Buddha taught that all men are brothers, 
that charity ought to be extended to all, even to 
enemies, that men ought to love truth and hate the lie, 
that good works must not be done openly, but rather 
in secret, that the dangers of riches are to be avoided, 
that man's highest aim ought to be purity in thought, 
word and deed, since the higher beings are pure, 
whose nature is akin to that of man. 3 All sacrifices 

1 Bastian, Reisen in China, 'Anhang.' 

2 Eitel, Buddhism, 121 ; Beal, Romantic History of Buddha, 177 ; Rhys 
Davids, Buddhism, 189 ; Koppen, Das Leben Buddhas. 

3 In the Dhammapada, Scriptural texts or parables of Buddha, as brought 


are to be abolished, as there can be no merit in them. 
If it were right to sacrifice a sheep, it would be right 
also to sacrifice a child, a relative or dear friend, ' and 
so do better.' Sakya-Muni healed the sick, performed 
miracles, and taught his doctrines to the poor. He 
selected his first disciples among laymen, and even two 
women, the mother and the wife of his first convert, 
the sick Yasa, became his followers. He subjected 
himself to the religious obligations imposed by the 
recognised authorities, avoided strife, and illustrated 
his doctrines by his life. He preached only in his own 
Magadhi, or Pah language, but it is recorded that even 
strangers understood him, everyone of his hearers 
thinking himself addressed in his own language. Those 
who belonged to the lowest class or caste, the Sudra or 
slaves, were especially the objects of his care, since the 
Law-book of Manu had expressly excluded them from 
the knowledge and the rewards of the life to come. 
We may assume from what we know, that to the poor 
and uneducated he only spoke in proverbs, whilst he 
gave to know to the disciples the mysteries of the 
Wisdom from above. The ' holy Prince ' and ' the 
Prince of Mortals ' is recorded to have said : ' You may 
remove from their base the snowy mountains, you may 
exhaust the waters of the ocean, the firmament may 
fall to earth, but my words in the end will be accom- 
plished.' 1 

To a Brahman, who was presiding over a ' plough- 
feast,' and who compared his labour with the men- 
dicancy of Buddha, the latter replied by a parable, of 
which various versions have been transmitted to us. 
' Brahman, I plough and sow, and of my ploughing 
and sowing I reap imperishable fruit. . . . My field 
is the Dliarma (truth) ; the weeds which I pluck up 

to Birmah by Buddaghosa, occurs the following : ' Buddha's third com- 
mandment, Commit no adultery, this law is broken by even looking at the 
wife of another with a lustful mind.' (Rogers, Buddaghom Parables, 153.) 
1 Romantic History, 158, 52, 138. 


(are) the cleaving to existence ; the plough which I use 
(is) wisdom ; the seed which I sow, the seeking of 
purity ; the work which I perform, attention to pre- 
cepts ; the harvest which I reap is Nirvana.' * Having 
explained these matters at greater length, he exhorted 
the Brahman to sow in the same field, unfolding before 
him the advantage of obtaining an entrance to the 
paths which lead to the destruction of sorrow.' 1 This 
took place in a village near Rajagrihu, when the 
Brahman, named Bharadwaja, was converted by Gau- 
tama. Another parable teaches that tares grow up 
with the wheat. 

' Dharma ' means truth or religion ; Wisdom is iden- 
tical with the Zoroastrian Divine Word, or ' honover,' 
through which God reveals his mysteries to man ; the 
' cleaving to existence,' or ' upadana,' which is one of 
the key-notes of Buddhism, ever means the character 
of the man about to die, the final shape of a man's 
personal longings or dislikes. If this character be 
centred * on Nirvana, then to Nirvana, to the place 
where God and all the Buddhas live, to the sun, man 
will go ; he will have a spiritual body like to the shining 
body of Brahma, he will shine as the Arhats, as the 
righteous shine (like the sun) in the heavenly country, 
in Nirvana, the sun. But if there is the least remnant 
of a desire after further material existence, he will 
then be born again to die again in some material con- 
dition or other, whether as the lowest reptile or as the 
highest of reasonable beings in the universe who has 
not yet entered Nirvana, the sun, where matter is anni- 
hilated, and where the harvest of the seed of Divine 
Wisdom,- of the Word, takes place. 

Gautama's cousin and favourite disciple, Ananda, 
once stood at a fountain, with one of the despised 
Chandala women, called Prakriti, and said to her : 

1 Spende Hardy, Christianity and Buddhism compared, 9G ; comp. Rhys 
Davids, I. c. 134, 135, and 72. 


'Give me to drink.' She pointed out her low caste, 
which forbad her to accost him ; but Gautama's disciple 
said : ' My sister, I do not ask after your family, I ask 
you for water,' whereupon she became a disciple, and 
was saved for the spiritual life. A similar spirit breathes 
through the legend, according to which the gift of a 
poor man filled Buddha's eleemosynary pot with flowers, 
whilst rich men were not able to fill it with 10,000 
measures. There is a treasure laid up by man, said 
Gautama, which is ' hid secure and passes not away,' 
which ' no thief can steal,' and which man ' takes with 
him.' The lamp of a poor woman was the only one 
which burnt during the whole night at a festivity in 
honour of Buddha. 1 

Gautama-Buddha is said to have announced to his 
disciples that the time of his departure had come : 
'Arise, let us go hence, my time is come.' Turned 
towards the East, and with folded hands, he prayed to 
the highest Spirit who inhabits the region of purest 
light, to Maha-Brahma, to the ' king in heaven, to 
Devaraja, who from his throne looked down on Gautama, 
and appeared to him in a self-chosen personality. This 
highest God to whom Buddha prayed, is Isvara-Deva, 
(or Abidha), ' the architect of the world ' ; and the place 
of his throne is ' the centre of supernatural light,' 
where there is no darkness, sin, birth or death, the 
Nirvana, the sun. 

The doctrines of Gautama-Buddha centred in the 
belief of a personal God, and in man's continued per- 
sonal existence after death. Buddhism resolves itself 
into a religion of humanity. The goal is the same as 
that of the Hebrew Psalmist : ' Unto Thee shall all flesh 
come.' It is recorded, how Gautama announced to his 
disciples, that another Buddha, and therefore another 
Angel in human form, another organ or advocate of the 
Wisdom from above, would descend from heaven to 

1 Koppen, Dos Lebcn Buddhas, i. 


earth, and that he would be called Maitreya, or ' Son of 
love.' It is thus implied, that also the future Tatha- 
gata or ' He that should come,' that the Messiah, whom 
the Buddhists still expect, will descend as ' Holy Ghost,' 
like Gautama-Buddha. So do the Hindus expect Kalki, 
the originator of a new age. The other advocate or 
Paraclete promised by Gautama, will likewise be a 
chosen instrument of the Spirit from above, a Spirit 
of truth, a heavenly messenger full of grace, who 
reveals the truth. 

It was at Allahabad, three months after having 
announced his departure, that Gautama died, and 
Buddha returned to heaven, entered Nirvana, the sun. 
The miracles which attended his death have been trans- 
mitted in various forms by probably later legends. The 
coverings of the body unrolled themselves, the lid of 
his coffin was opened by supernatural power, and 
Gautama-Buddha's feet appeared to his disciples in the 
form which they knew so well. This was an answer to 
Kasyapa's prayer. The latter asked Ananda why the 
departed master's feet were soiled with wet ; he was 
told that a weeping woman had embraced Gautama's 
feet shortly before his death, and that her tears had 
fallen on his feet and left the marks on them. 1 

Gautama-Buddha constantly taught the great truth 
conveyed in the phrase ' vicarious suffering,' or suffering 
borne for the good of another. The commonest story 
about him is, that in a former birth he gave his body 
and blood to a hawk to save the life of a dove (did he 
know it as the symbol of the Spirit of God ?). All the 
Jatakas are full of this idea. But Buddhism knows 
absolutely nothing of the idea of an offended God, who 
requires reconciliation by vicarious suffering. 

1 From the Vinaya-Pitaka as known in China (Beal), 



With the remarkable exception of the death of 
Jesus on the cross, 1 and of the doctrine of atonement 
by vicarious suffering, which is absolutely excluded by 
Buddhism, the most ancient of the Buddhistic records 
known to us contain statements about the life and the 
doctrines of Gautama-Buddha which correspond in a 
remarkable manner, and impossibly by mere chance, 
with the traditions recorded in the Gospels about the 
life and doctrines of Jesus Christ. It is still more 
strange that these Buddhistic legends about Gautama 
as the Angel-Messiah refer to a doctrine which we find 
only in the Epistles of Paul and in the fourth Gospel. 

This can be explained by the assumption of a common 
source of revelation ; but then the serious question must 
be considered, why the doctrine of the Angel-Messiah, 
supposing it to have been revealed, and which we find 
in the East and in the West, is not contained in any of 
the Scriptures of the Old Testament which can possibly 
have been written before the Babylonian Captivity, nor 
in the first three Gospels. Can the systematic keeping 
back of essential truth be attributed to God or to 
man? Had we only to consider the statements of 
Paul, we should be led to believe in the gradual revela- 
tion or publication of the mystery kept in secret. For 
he declares that he preached ' the hidden wisdom,' after 
that he had ' renounced the hidden things of dishonesty,' 
or, rather, ' the shameful hiding,' which Moses had first 
introduced, and which had led to a ' deceitful handling,' 
or, rather, to a falsifying, of God's Word. According to 
the theory we are considering, it would have been Paul 
who, not doing like Moses, had first ' commended him- 
self to every man's conscience in the sight of God ' by 
1 manifestation,' or, rather, ' revelation of the truth.' 

1 Among the prophecies respecting Buddha's coming is the assertion 
that ' his death shall be a quiet and painless one.' {Rom. Hist. 51.) 


In this case it might not have been before the second 
century that, by the publication of the Gospel after 
John, the preaching of Jesus Christ was revealed in its 
absolute fulness and purity. The first Evangelists, ac- 
cording to this theory, had to consider the opposition 
of the Jewish authorities, who had forbidden the public 
preaching of this secret doctrine, whilst Jesus is implied 
to have forbidden the Apostles forthwith to preach 
from the roofs the mysteries which — so we are told — 
he had made known to them alone, whilst speaking only 
in parables to the people. According to this explana- 
tion of the problem presented to us, Jesus must have 
been an Essene. 

The theory of an essentially similar revelation in 
East and West would harmonise with the conceptions 
of Paul. He writes that God had never left himself 
without witness, that man's conscience is the witness of 
God, and that a ' mystery ' was hid in God from the 
beginning of the world, which ' eternal purpose ' was in 
his time made known as it had in former times not 
been made known. 1 According to this universalist 
conception, held by Origen and Augustine, Christian 
revelation is directly connected with Divine revelations 
at all times and in all places, with a continuity of Divine 

The doctrine of an Angel-Messiah might, therefore, 
have been first revealed in the East, and there applied 
to Gautama-Buddha. On this hypothesis, the latter 
would have been the forerunner of Jesus Christ, and 
for this reason Buddhistic tradition would have been 
applied to Jesus Christ, and introduced into the New Tes- 
tament Scriptures, which Eusebius considered ' highly 
probable.' The object would have been to make clear 
to the Initiated of tradition the connection between 
Divine revelations in East and West. On this theory it 
would be an open question : whether Jesus has sanc- 

1 Rom. ii. 14, 15; Eph. iii. 9-11. 
e 2 


tioned the application to himself of the doctrine about 
the Ano-el-Messiah ; or whether it was not till after his 
death that this application and, therefore, enlargement 
of doctrine, took place. 

Did such connections between East and West exist 
before and during the Apostolic age, that we may 
assume as possible in the West a knowledge of Oriental 
tradition ? 




Introduction — Theory on the Origin of the Gods — Transmigration of souls — 
Eastern knowledge of Pythagoras — The Goddess Hestia —Pythagoras and 
the Dorians. 


Is the East the direct or the indirect source of the 
doctrines of Pythagoras? The accounts of Pliny, 
Apuleius and others about the travels of Pythagoras 
to the East, as well as to Egypt and Mesopotamia, may 
be dismissed as insufficient evidence. And yet, since 
already a century before his time Psammetick (b.c. 666 
-612) had opened to the world the ports of Egypt, 
these countries can have been visited by Pythagoras 
of Samos, the contemporary of Tarquinius Superbus 
(b.c. 540-510), and possibly descended from Pythagoras, 
king of Kidrusi in Cyprus, who paid tribute to Assur- 
banipal in B.C. 684. But the earliest authority for his 
journey to Egypt does not reach further back than 150 
years after his death. Even without having been in the 
East, the founder of the mystic, ascetic, and apparently 
aristocratic confederation at Crotona, established on the 
basis of secrecy, may have been initiated by Greek 
hierophants into the mysteries of a hidden wisdom 
which was not unconnected with the East. The 
Eastern origin of European languages is proved ; and it 
is generally admitted, that the aboriginal inhabitants of 
Greece imported from the East, together with their 
language, ' the general foundations of their religion and 
customs,' also that they continued to live under in- 


fluences which reached them from the East, partly by 
way of Thrace and the Bosphorus, partly by the iEgean 
Sea and its islands. In the face of these general ad- 
missions, it is held on the one side, that Greek philo- 
sophy was essentially the product of the Greek brain, 
on the other, that the entire circle of Greek conceptions 
was imported ready made from without. 1 We submit 
that some new light can be thrown on this question by 
comparative mythology. 

The Origin of the Gods. 

We must here assume, what we tried to prove else- 
where, that the Cosmical was the symbol of the Ethical 
in earliest historical times, and that the numbers, by 
which, according to Jamblichus (before a.d. 333), the 
Egyptians designated their divisions in the heavens, 
that is, the numbers 2, 4, 12, 36, and 72, can be all 
referred to astronomical observations, some of which 
preceded the invention of the Zodiac. 2 According 
to the contrary argument, as elaborately worked out 
by von Thimus, the starting-point of symbolism with 
all nations is ' the revealed doctrine of aboriginal times, 
as transmitted by the second ancestor of mankind 
(Noah), to all his nearest descendants in aboriginal, 
full and untarnished purity.' 3 

Since the Pythagoraeans maintained th at * the number 
rules the Cosmos,' we may at the outset suppose, that 
the first Greek philosopher who used the word 'cosmos' 
in our sense, designating thereby the order in the 

1 Zeller, Die Philosojihie der Griechen ; Roth, Geschichte der Abendland- 
ischen Philosophie, i. 74, 241 . 

2 Die Plejaden und der Thierkreis. 

3 Von Thimus, Harmonikale Symbolik des Alterthums, ii. 347. The theory 
about the harmony of the spheres was symbolised by the Mishkol or balance 
of the Kabbala, with which was connected ' the little tongue of the balance ' 
in the mystic book Jezirah. These two expressions can be shown to relate, 
like the Egyptian balance of good and evil, to the equinoctial and the sol- 
stitial balance. The earliest symbol of the harmony of the spheres was 
Apollo's lyre of seven strings, which certainly had nothing to do with the 


universe, connected the numbers with that order, that 
he regarded them as figurative expressions of those 
forces in nature which under the harmonising influence 
of a Supreme Will, brought about the regular move- 
ments of bodies in space, and thus the order in the 
universe. From this point of view the Cosmos might 
be called a revelation in numbers. 

It would seem that the Pythagorean symbolism of 
numbers referred originally, and perhaps long before 
Thales and Pythagoras, neither to arithmetic nor to 
geometry as such, but to a mechanical system of nature, 
to the relative relations of cosmical bodies, to the order 
of their revolutions, and to the presumable Divine cause 
of such order. This is not the place to inquire, whether 
and to what extent the atomistic science of nature, as 
taught by the two Grecian philosophers, Leucippus and 
Democritus (about B.C. 461-361), was also acknow- 
ledged, or whether it was opposed by Pythagoras. Nor 
do we now ask whether he, like the Ionians Anaxi- 
menes (about 544), and Heraklitos (about 513), taught 
a periodic origin and passing away of the earth and 
other bodies in space. But the views of Pythagoras 
about the origin of the Gods cannot be doubted, since 
the theogony, according to the views of his tutor 
Pherecydes, has been transmitted to us. Next to the 
theogony of Hesiodus, it is the most ancient we possess, 
and its substratum can be shown to have been Eastern 
astronomy. Although it may have possibly been Greece 
where the first attempt was made to explain the Cosmos 
by a theory on its origin, it was Eastern science which 
gave the materials for such speculations. 

According to Pherecydes (about B.C. 544), or rather 
according to the ' Phoenician ' tradition to which he 
referred, the fundamental cause of all phenomena in 
nature is Zeus or Chronos, whom he also calls, but dis- 
tinguishes in a certain sense from Chthon, that is, the 
material substances of the earth, including the sea. 
He designates Chronos as a deity, dwelling in that part 


of heaven which is nearest to the earth. We know 
that Chronos is the Seb of the Egyptians, and with 
Ehea-Netpe he gave birth to the five planets, in honour 
of which, five additional days were added to the calendar 
of 360 days, after that Thot, the God of history and 
astronomy, who is represented as riding on the moon, 
and whose mystical number was 72, had played at 
dice with the moon, and gained for each planet the 
72nd part of 360 days. This Egyptian legend seems 
to have been framed after the Phoenician legend or 
myth of the seven children of Chronos and Ehea, of 
which the youngest had been translated to the Gods. 
Movers has explained these seven children of Zeus- 
Chronos by the Pleiades, one of which seven stars had 
disappeared in course of time. Since Pherecydes admits 
to have drawn from a Phoenician source, he must have 
known this Phoenician legend, and he may be assumed 
to have connected with the seven sons of Zeus-Chronos 
the seven Patasci of the Phoenicians, and the Cabiri 
of Egyptians and Greeks, whom some identified with 
the sons of Ehea. 

Zeus-Chronos thus seems to have been by Phere- 
cydes connected with the Pleiades in Taurus, as the 
divinity dwelling in these seven stars, like the Sibut of 
the ancient Babylonians, the Sebaot or Zabaot of the 
Hebrews, and other deities. This hypothesis is con- 
firmed by other details about the theogony of the tutor 
of Pythagoras. The first creation of Zeus-Chronos was 
fire. According to the Indian myth on the descent of 
fire, the same was brought to earth from heaven by a 
messenger of Indra, by Agni, called the Matarisvan. 
This name, Mr. Haliburton, of Nova Scotia, has con- 
nected with the Matarii, as the Pleiades are still called 
by islanders in the Pacific. We have pointed out in 
another place, 1 that the fire-sticks or Arani of the 
Indians, which were a sacred symbol to the ancient 
Babylonians, point to the origin of the Cross as con- 

1 Das Symbol des Kreuzes bet alien Nationen; Die Plejaden und der Thierkreis. 


nected with the symbolism of fire. It can be shown 
that Bel's flaming sword which turned every way, and 
the flaming sword of the Cherub, that is, Kirub or bull, 
according to the language of Cuneiform Inscriptions, 
originally referred to the Pleiades in Taurus, from whence 
fire was supposed to have first descended upon the earth. 

The connection of the Cross with fire receives a 
remarkable confirmation by the Chinese symbol of the 
headless cross or Tau. It becomes increasingly pro- 
bable that the Chinese interpretation of the cross- 
symbol is more ancient than the provable introduction 
of the same into other countries. For ' it is now 
asserted by one of our best Sinologists (Dr. Edkins), 
that the phonetic roots of the Chinese language are the 
same as those of Europe ; in other words, that the 
Chinese phonetic roots are those from which the lan- 
guages of Europe, and therefore of India, were originally 
developed.' 1 

Among the earliest and simplest ideographic symbols 
in the Chinese language is one which resembles precisely 
our capital letter T, without the final strokes, signifying 
that which is ' above,' and the converse of this, the T 
resting on its base (j.), signifies that which is ' below.' 
In both cases a point or a comma, as if a tongue of fire, 
is added, as similarly in Europe a dot or tongue of fire 
is placed occasionally over an angel or divine messenger, 
to signify his more than human character. This dot, 
as signifying fire, is clearly pointed out in the symbol 
for fire itself in the Chinese language, and it is this : a 
piece of wood boring into another piece, and on the 
opposite side a spark issuing, indicating the generation 
of fire by friction, thus ■ K. Now, the dot as signifying 
fire was placed, as Agni was placed by the Indians, in a 
place of pre-eminence over the visible world. Hence, 
connecting this idea with that of the former, with the 

1 Professor Baal in the ' President's Address,' Journal of the Plymouth 
Institution, vol. vi., part i. ; pp. 21, 22, from whence the following extract is 


symbol for height or heaven, we have the complete idea 
represented symbolically of the supreme power pictured 
as fire or a spark presiding over the lower world, and 
so placed above it. This symbolism is visible every- 
where. In Egypt we find the well-known ' key of the 
Nile ' in the hand of Isis, denoting simply the supreme 
power exercised by that divinity. The same symbol in 
China denotes the supreme Lord or Euler of the Uni- 
verse, and is, in fact, a part of the expression used to 
signify ' God.' We have here, then, one of the earliest 
inventions of man by which is denoted something 
' above,' that which is visible to the eye, or • heaven.' 

Hence the symbol T means to come down from 
above, where the dot or fiery tongue denotes a spark 
or flame descending from the upper world, which is 
signified by T. Hence again, J_ means the lower world, 
and the symbol J> means to go up from below, or to 
ascend. The Chinese imagine that there are three 
worlds or spheres, corresponding to the Sanskrit vhu, 
vhuvar, and svar, and the Chinese symbolise these three 
heavens by three lines, =. When they wish to symbolise 
the idea of Lord or Euler of the three spheres, they 
cross the three horizontal lines by a perpendicular line, 
5E. 1 The Chinese add to this symbol the dot for a 
1 flame ' or ' fire ' above it, thus =E. 2 

When solar-symbolism took the place of fire-sym- 
bolism, the sun's disc took the place of the fiery tongue, 
and thus originated the so-called handle-cross of the 
Egyptians, the symbol of life. As symbol of life it is 
represented without the circle under the nostrils of a 
Pharaoh, whilst a line connects the Tau-cross with the 
sun or solar disc. Thus was expressed in an Egyptian 
figure or symbol, similar to one of the Chinese, how the 
God whose symbol was held to be the sun, breathed 
into the nostrils of man ' the breath of life.' 

1 The Papal crozier has exactly the same form. 

2 Professor Beal in a letter to the author. 


Not only the Tau-cross of the Egyptians, but also 
the symbolism represented by the candlestick of Moses, 
astronomically explained by Philo and Josephus, may 
be connected with the Chinese symbol for the ruler of 
the three worlds or of the universe. But Moses did not 
only represent a flame over the central candlestick, fol- 
lowing the analogy of the fiery tongue over the vertical 
line of the divine Chinese symbol, he also represented a 
flame at the six ends of the three horizontal lines of this 
Eastern symbol. As the sun's disc over the Egyptian 
Tau-cross had taken the place of the fiery tongue above 
the similar Chinese Tau, so, according to the explana- 
tion of Philo, the central lamp of the candlestick referred 
to the sun, although the Initiated in the deeper know- 
ledge or gnosis knew that the central lamp symbolised 
the Word of God, which, in the Book of Wisdom, 
possibly composed by Philo, is said to have been 
symbolised by the fiery serpent in the desert. 1 

The reversed Tau-cross, symbol of the lower world, 
with the Chinese perhaps the most ancient of the two, 
may be regarded as having referred in the first place to 
the horizontal balance of aboriginal times, which con- 
nected the two determining single stars on the horizon, 
like Aldebaran and Antares, by Indians called ' rohin ' or 
red, no doubt because the rising and the setting sun 
made them appear red. 2 According to this hypothesis, 
the vertical line of this symbol would date from a later 
time, and would point to the vertical balance, formed 
by the culminations of these determining stars. These 
three points in the sphere formed the very ancient holy 
triangle, which in the Holiest of the Holy in the Jewish 
Temple was represented by the Shechina in the midst and 
above the two Cherubim, and which later was connected 
with the Divine Trinity in Unity. 3 

1 Nackash means in Hebrew ' brass ' and l serpent .' 

2 According to Mr. Lockyer's explanation. 
8 Die Plejaden und der Thierkreis. 


If the astronomical origin of this Oriental symbolism 
is proved, as also its introduction in the West in pre- 
Mosaic times, it may be unhesitatingly asserted that the 
connection of Zeus-Chronos by Pherecydes with that 
part of the earth which was nearest to * heaven,' points 
to the above astronomical symbolism. We may at the 
outset assume, that what the tutor of Pythagoras 
conceived as ' heaven ' was the exclusively spiritual 
or non-material world, which notion we find in the 
Zendavesta and in Ionic tradition, but which was dis- 
tinguished, uncompromisingly by non-East-Iranian and 
non-Ionic traditions, from the material world. This 
system of two worlds may be assumed to have origi- 
nated in the important discovery of the horizontal, later 
equinoctial Balance, formed by the two determining 
stars on the horizon, reddened by the sun, and which 
seemed to divide the Cosmos into two parts. The light 
hemisphere seems to have been originally regarded as 
the spiritual world ; but special constellations, later the 
sun, were regarded as the dwelling-place of the God 
who causes the order in the universe, and as centre of 
the spiritual world. 

This symbolism enables us to suggest that Phere- 
cydes may have regarded as dwelling-place of Zeus- 
Chronos the Eastern determining star of aboriginal 
times, AMebaran in Taurus, or the Pleiades in the same 
constellation. Since the seven sons of Zeus-Chronos and 
of Khea, according to Phoenician legend were, as we 
showed, connected with the Pleiades, this constellation, 
inhabited according to Old-Babylonian and to Hebrew 
tradition, by the God Sibut-Sebaot, appears indeed to 
have designated the part of the earth which was con- 
ceived to be nearest to heaven and the dwelling-place 
of Zeus. For the Pleiades stood once nearest to 
the most ancient equinoctial points observed, and the 
parts of the sphere determined by the latter mark those 
points on the horizon where the path of the sun appears 


to touch the path of the fixed stars, and at the same 
time the equator, and thus the earth. This explanation 
is finally confirmed by the fact to which Pherecydes 
refers, that Zeus-Chronos was the creator of fire and 
then of the earth, as if the creator of heaven and earth, 
whilst the Pleiades, as already said, were regarded as 
the locality where fire originates. 

In order to frame the world, Zeus transforms him- 
self into Eros, the god of love, not mentioned in the 
Homeric Poems, but whom the Orphics before Phere- 
cydes explain to have been the son of Chronos, and the 
first who issued forth from the mundane egg. Eros 
was thus connected with Castor, the first-born of the 
Dioscuri, who were called sons of Zeus and Leda. Since 
the Dioscuri can be connected with the Aswin, or two 
Bulls of Indian tradition, with the rising and setting- 
Taurus, to which also Osiris and the Cherubim and 
Seraphim were referred, the argument gains in force, 
that Zeus, who was called the highest, like Osiris-Wasar, 
according to the most ancient Greek theogony known to 
us, was supposed to be the God inhabiting the Pleiades 
in Taurus. 

Eros became the vicar of Zeus and the framer of 
the world, and so Serosh took the place of Ormuzd as 
first of the seven Amshaspancls, which referred to the 
Pleiades. Like Eros, Serosh was considered as the 
framer of the world. Again, as Serosh-Sraosha was 
connected with the celestial watchers, and thus with 
the Pleiades, being therefore opposed by the ideal hero 
in the opposite constellations of Scorpio or the Ser- 
pent, the adversary of Eros is the serpent-deity Ophio- 
neus. Eros must therefore be regarded as one of the 
ideal heroes of light, who were connected with the 
constellation of the spring-equinox, originally with 
Taurus and the Pleiades, and opposed by serpent- 
deities. Eros was contrasted to Ophioneus as Ormuzd 
was to Ahriman, Indra to Ahi, Osiris to Typhon, 


Dionysos to the serpent-footed Titans, Apollos to 
Python, Buddha to Mara (Naga), Christ to Antichrist, 
the satan, devil, or old serpent. 

The localisation of these Eastern and Western sym- 
bols enables us to assert that the theogony of Phe- 
recydes, and therefore also of Pythagoras, was inse- 
parably connected with astronomical observations of 
the East. It is certainly not only the myth of 
Demeter and of Dionysos, the Indian Bacchus, which 
can be proved to have been introduced into Greece 
from without. 

The Orphic cosmogony, which is mere ancient than 
Pythagoras and his tutor, confirms our explanation of 
the Greek theogony as based on astronomical obser- 
vations of the East, and on the symbolism connected 
with it. Chronos, the fundamental principle, creates 
the opposing principles of light and darkness, the 
asther and the chaos, from which Chronos forms a 
silver egg, from which again issues forth the enlighten- 
ing Phanes, who is also called Eros and Metis, that is, 
Wisdom, the Greek Sophia and the Indian Boclhi. The 
Sophia was later designated as daughter of Okeanos 
and Thetis. The latter already Hesiodus mentions as 
the first consort of Zeus, who devoured her, at the 
suggestion of Gsea and Uranos, in order to prevent the 
birth of a Divine being. Zeus caused Athene, symbol 
of the morning dawn, to issue forth from his head. 
The statue and temple of Athene were turned towards 
the middle dawn of the equinoxes, 1 a trait of the myth 
which confirms the astronomical character of the ear- 
liest known nature-symbols, and the connection of 
Greek philosophy with Eastern astronomy and sym- 

We are now in a position to assume that already 
centuries before Pythagoras, the Initiated among the 
Greeks, the epopts, were taught in and through the 

1 Eraile Burnouf, La Legende Atheniennc. 


mysteries a more speculative theology, a deeper know- 
ledge or gnosis, to which the so-called Gnomons re- 
ferred by dark sentences, riddles, or proverbs. From 
this it would follow that, through the Mysteries, secret 
doctrines of Oriental priests could be transmitted to 
Greek philosophers, which through them reached the 
public. All Greeks were admitted to the representa- 
tion of the mystic symbols, but these were not intended 
for the education of the people, and not explained to 
them. Moreover, there were certain ceremonies to 
which only the Initiated were admitted. 

Even without having travelled to the East, Pytha- 
goras, the contemporary of Buddha, could have, and it 
will become more and more probable that he had, a 
knowledge of Eastern wisdom. 

The Transmigration of Souls. 

The connection of the Pythagorean doctrine about 
the transmigration of souls with the Dionysian Myth 
confirms in the most absolute manner the direct con- 
nection between Greek philosophy and Eastern astro- 
nomical symbolism. Pythagoras is said to have been 
the first who taught this doctrine in Greece, the first 
traces of which occur among the Brahmans and Bud- 
dhists. According to the Buddhistic ' Tradition from 
beyond,' the Bodhi, or Wisdom from above, was per- 
sonified by angels and by men, and the spiritual power 
or Maya, the Brahm, was also called the Word, or the 
Holy Spirit. From time to time an Angel is designated 
in his turn to be born in the flesh, and to teach as the 
enlightened man, as Buddha and as Saviour of the 
World, the wisdom which he has brought from the 
upper and spiritual to the lower and material world. 
This incarnate Angel-Messiah, after having fulfilled his 
mission, returns to the upper spheres, his transforma- 
tions, his deaths and births, his change of body, what 


the Greeks called 'meteusomatosis,' have come to an end 
for him, and he enters the locality, the characteristic 
feature of which is Nirvana or destruction, that is, the 
annihilation of matter. This last resting-place of the 
spirit, where the harvest takes place, is the abode of the 
spirits perfected before him, and also the dwelling-place of 
the self-existent deity, Isvara-Deva. Nirvana is the sun. 
The doctrine of the incarnation of the Angel-Messiah 
or Buddha, his birth in the flesh as the last of a series 
of births, was connected with the doctrine of the soul's 
transmigrations, and thus with a concatenation of 
bodily existences. Each of these formed a new prison 
for the soul, which was held to be of heavenly, of 
immaterial, of spiritual origin. According to Egyptian 
conception the soul had to migrate from the lowest 
animal to the highest, and thus had to become em- 
bodied by men as well as by higher beings of other 
stars. The graduated scale of the soul's transformations 
was by the Egyptians connected with the Phoenix- 
period. The Phoenix-bird or Phenno is by Herodotus 
described as most like an eagle, and every 500 years, 
as he was told, the young bird buried the old bird at 
Heliopolis. At Heliopolis was the Mnevis or black Bull 
with the white sign of an eagle (Phenno) on its back. 
This Bull with the mark of the Phoenix can be proved 
to have referred to the celestial Bull, to the constel- 
lation of Taurus, which in the East rises on the horizon 
as ' the living Apis,' and sets in the West as 'dead Apis' 
or ' Bull of the West.' The places on the horizon which 
are marked by the rising and setting Taurus, like those 
marked by the new moon and the full moon, and which 
were called ' the two eyes ' of the moon-god Thot, were 
held to be ' the two heavenly gates,' between which the 
migrations of the soul were conceived to take place 
according to the Book of the Dead. So also Osiris, 
originally the God in the Pleiades, had to migrate 
through the fourteen moon-stations of the lower sphere 


before he could rise again in the East with the Pleiades 
in Taurus as the God in the Pleiades, in order to re- 
commence his rule in the fourteen moon-stations of the 
upper hemisphere. 

The connection of the Pythagorean doctrine about 
the transmigrations of the soul with Dionysian or 
Bacchic rites is generally acknowledged, and is as 
certain as the connection of the Dionysos Myth with 
that of Osiris. These myths must be connected with 
the East and astronomically interpreted, if the locali- 
sation of these and similar nature-symbols has been 
established. Assuming this, it follows that the con- 
nection of Pythagorean conceptions with provable 
astronomical observations and symbols of the East can 
no longer be doubted. 

Among the ideal heroes of light which, like Osiris 
and Dionysos, were connected with the spring-equinoc- 
tial constellation, and were opposed by ideal heroes of 
darkness inhabiting the constellation of the autumn- 
equinox, was also Buddha, the contemporary of Pytha- 
goras. Because Buddha was symbolised by the sun, 
he was represented as Lamb, referring to the spring- 
equinoctial sign of Aries in his time, which rose on the 
horizon at his birth. Even the expectation of the 
coming Buddha was connected with this Eastern astro- 
nomical symbolism. The expectation of his birth on 
Christmas-day, and at midnight, is connected with a 
symbolism which is much more ancient than the time 
of Gautama-Buddha. 

The Goddess Hestia. 

We saw that the creator of fire, as later of sun, 
moon, and earth, that Zeus-Chronos throned in the 
Pleiades according to the theogony of the tutor of 
Pythagoras, and that according to Indian tradition the 
Matarisvan, the messenger of Indra, sent from the 


Matarii or Pleiades to the earth, that Agni, whose 
secret name was Matarisvan, was held to have brought 
the fire and the fire-sticks to the earth. With these 
Oriental conceptions of Pherecydes the statement may 
be connected, that the Pythagoreans placed the fire- 
goddess Hestia in the centre of the universe. We may 
assume that Pythagoras knew for what reason the sun 
had taken the place of fire as symbol of the Divinity. 
Pythagoras could regard the sun as the centre, though 
not of the universe, yet of the solar system, with which 
he seems to have been acquainted. This hypothesis is 
confirmed indirectly by the place which the Pythago- 
reans seem to have assigned to the earth as to the 
second moon, perhaps because the moon accompanies 
the earth in its rotation round the sun, both receiving 
their light from the latter. 

Pythagoras could assign to the sun the central 
position in the solar system, without giving up the 
Oriental connection of the fire with the Pleiades, the 
latter as the throne of the God by whom fire had 
been sent. From this the conception would arise of 
the Pleiades, or a star in this constellation, as the throne 
of Hestia and as centre of the universe. It is remark- 
able that, according to the calculations of the astro- 
nomer Maedler, the earth's sun appears to rotate round 
a star in the Pleiades. More important still is it for 
our purpose, that according to statements made by 
Cicero and Plutarch about astronomical conceptions of 
some Pythagoreans, especially of Aristarchos from 
Samos, who flourished from about B.C. 280 to 264, 
Copernicus, led by these ideas, as he himself seems to 
imply, separated the equinoctial points from the solar 
path, and thus may be said to have re-established the 
most ancient and absolutely exact year of the East, 
Avhich was regulated by fixed stars. 1 

1 Die Pljaden und der Thierkreis; comp. Foerster, wisscmchaftliehe 


Pythagoras and the Dorians. 

A connection can be rendered probable between the 
ethnic dualism of Iranians and Indians on the one side 
and that of the Sumir and Akkad in Mesopotamia, 
as well as with the still much disputed dualism of 
Ionians and Dorians in Greece. Here it must suffice to 
point out that the Iranians, as well as the Akkad and 
the Ionians, wrote from right to left, like all ' Semitic ' 
people, and that the Veclic Indians, probably also the 
ancient Egyptians before they became ' semitised,' and 
certainly the Dorians, wrote from left to right. From 
this it becomes probable that the combination of 
these two modes of writing in alternate lines, the 
so-called Boustrophedon-form, points to a transition 
period. 1 

We purpose to substantiate the hypothesis that the 
Ionians and Dorians, come from the East at different 
times, introduced two independent philosophical sys- 
tems, a double Oriental tradition. 

According to Clement of Alexandria, the Italic 
school of philosophy founded by Pythagoras had been 
entirely different from the Ionic school of Thales. Yet 
he states that both doctrinal systems originated in 
Phoenicia. According to our interpretation of what is 
called Semitic, this can be explained by the assumption 
that both traditions had once been introduced into 
Phoenicia, into the land of Canaan, which before the 
Japhetic immigration was inhabited chiefly if not ex- 
clusively by Hamites. 

By a geographic and an ethnic interpretation of the 
genealogical names in the 10th chapter of Genesis, the 
Hamites can be traced from the lowlands of the Oxus 
and Indus to the Nile, the Jordan, and the Euphrates 
and Tigris. So likewise the Japhetites can be traced 
by the highland of Iran to the south of the Caspian, 

1 Die Plejaden und der Thierkreis, 39G-400. 


from whence they conquered Mesopotamia, according 
to Berosus in B.C. 2458. This year is implied in 
Genesis to have been that of the birth of Shem, which 
took place 98 years after 5th e Flood, the era of which 
commenced in B.C. 2360 according to Censorinus. 
These Japhetites or Iranians were called, in their own 
or a cognate language, Casdim, or conquerors, as proved 
by the language of Cuneiform Inscriptions. InUr- 
Casdim the ancestors of Abraham were born. Like 
all the Hamites who inhabited Mesopotamia and other 
countries of the West, the Hebrews were subjugated by 
the Japhetic conquerors, and these combinations of 
Japhetites and Hamites, ever since the year of Shem's 
birth, is in Genesis narrated as a family history and 
referred to in the genealogies of Shem. 1 

Clement further states, that according to the opinion 
of most people Pythagoras was a barbarian, a word 
which seems to have been formed after the Indian 
'varvara,' and thus would designate a black-skinned 
man with woolly hair. 2 If a barbarian or non-Aryan, 
Pythagoras was a Hamite, a word formed after ' cham ' 
or ' kem,' which in Egyptian means ' black.' The Hamites 
of Genesis are cognate with the Homeric ' Ethiopians 
from the East,' and these have migrated from India to 
the West according to the ethnic scheme just referred 
to. Accordingly, the barbarian descent of Pythagoras 
would connect him with India, and his acquaintance 
with the Indian Bodhi or Wisdom would become 
increasingly probable, whether he met his contem- 
porary Gautama-Buddha or not. The probability has 
been pointed out, that the ancestors of Pythagoras, of 
Tyrrhenian descent, migrated from Plilius in the Pelo- 
ponnese to the Ionic Samos. 3 In so far the Hamitic 

1 Gen. xi. 28; comp. The Chronologij of the Bible, and T. G. Miiller, 
Die Semit.en in ihrem Verhiiltnks zu Japhetiten unci Hamiten. 

2 Contrasted to the varvara was the pulaMta, the white-skinned man 
with smooth and reddish hair. 'Varna ' means ' caste ' and ' colour ' in Sanscrit. 

s Zeller, I.e. 


descent of Pythagoras would thus be confirmed, as the 
Tyrrhenians or Tursi were a cognate race with the 
Etruscans, the majority of which was certainly non- 
Aryan, Turian, or Hamitic. 1 

From the early combination of Ionic and Doric 
elements, which we distinguish as Japhetic-Iranic and 
Hamitic-Indian, it does not follow that the undeniable 
tribal distinctions in Greece were at all times of secon- 
dary importance, and that they were not influential in 
moulding the forms of Greek thought and the Greek 
institutions. All critics agree that in the tendency of 
the life of Pythagoras the non-Homeric or Doric spirit 
is clearly distinguishable. The influence of the Ionic 
conceptions about nature, and of the Ionic language on 
Pythagoras can be sufficiently explained by the con- 
nection of both tribes. It cannot be a mere chance, 
and it may be designated as a logical consequence of 
the presumable ethnic dualism in Greece, that Homer 
represented the Ionic, Pythagoras the Doric tradition, 
and that the oracle at Dodona was the organ of the one, 
that of Delphi, with its consecrations, of the other. 

4 The belief in oracles commences before Homer, is 
mighty before Solon, and especially in the Delphic 
sanctuary of Apollos it united the one with the other, 
even with barbarians. It survives Socrates and Demos- 
thenes, and dies out at the end of the Eoman republic, 
in order to gain an artificial and unreal life under 
Hadrian and the Antonines ; it is only then that the 
oracles become silent for ever. The consecrations and 
purifications form the connecting link between Delphi 
and the Orphics. Orpheus, Musaeus, Linus, as already 
Aristotle clearly says, are mythical names, but names 
for a real old Thrakian doctrine about the Gods, the 
oracles and hymns of which Demokritos, the contem- 
porary and instrument of Pisistratos, collected and falsi- 

1 Die Plejaden unci cler Thierkreis, 394. 


fied by insertions. At that time the Orphics were a 
kind of fakirs, wandering jugglers and enchanters. But 
it belonged to the political system of the ancient ruling 
houses to bring back to their accustomed value every- 
thing that was priestly and ritualistic — consecrations, 
oracles, and ceremonies. To this tendency Homer's 
consciousness of God is directly opposed.' * 

According to statements made by Herodotus, who 
first transmits the names of the Hias and the Odyssey, 
Homer the Ionian is said to have nourished about 
B.C. 850, therefore perhaps not more than two centuries 
before the birth of Pythagoras. A much earlier date 
of Homer, or of the authors of the Homeric Poems trans- 
mitted to us, is rendered improbable above all by the 
circumstance that in these poems so little notice is 
taken of Ionic Athens. This is easily explained if we 
assume that in the form transmitted to us they were 
composed after the Doric conquest of the Peloponnese, 
which may have taken place long before the traditional 
date B.C. 1104, an hypothesis which seems to be con- 
firmed by the excavations of Schliemann. In this sup- 
position the insertions in favour of the Athenians would 
be explained, which may have originated in the ad- 
dresses of the Ehapsodi held at Athens. They were 
even attributed to Solon and to Pisistratos, and they 
have certainly not been eradicated in the first written 
records of the songs which the latter caused to be 
made. That Lycurgus brought them from Ionia to 
Sparta is a non-proven assertion. 

The more the Ionian Homer can be connected with 
the Japhetic-Iranian tradition, the more certain will 
become the descent of Pythagoras from the Dorians, 
and the connection of the latter with Hamitic-Indian 

Like the Iranian hero Thraetona, like the Iranian 

1 Bunsen, God in History, German edition, ii. 281, 286, 287; comp. 
Gerland, Homerische Sag en. 


Sethite Lamech, and like Noah the Hebrew, Hellen the 
son of Deucalion has three sons : — 

Thraetona : Airya, 


Sairma ; 

Lamech : Jabal, 


Thubal-Cain ; 

Noah : Japhet, 


Sliem ; 

Hellen : JEolus, 



In the 10th chapter of Genesis the descendants of 
Japhet, called ' the elder ' in the text, are first men- 
tioned, those of Shem last ; a circumstance which in- 
directly confirms our interpretation of the Shemites as 
a combination of Japhetites and Hamites. In the order 
enumerated above, the -iEolians, that is the original 
Ionians, are shown to be identical with the Japhetites, 
as the Dorians with the Hamites. 

This is confirmed in the first place by the fact that 
the name Ionian, or Taon, cannot be separated from the 
name Javan, by which name the Hebrews have at all 
times until now designated the Greeks. Also in Cunei- 
form Inscriptions of the eighth century, the name 
Javnan or Junan occurs as designation of the inhabitants 
of Cyprus. According to the 10th chapter of Genesis, 
Javan is a son of Japhet, and therefore belongs to the 
Iranian tribe, like Madai or the Medes, who as Casdim, 
later Chaldeans, belonging to the family of the Akkad, 
conquered Mesopotamia. The transition of the name 
Javan to that of Ionians, stands in connection with the 
worship of Io the moon, which was gradually set aside 
by the Dorians. The original name of Ionia was Achsea, 
or Achaia, the land of the Achaians or Akkaians, the 
Akkaiusha of Egyptian monuments of the thirteenth 
century. This is to be explained by the cognate rela- 
tions between the Javan and the Akkad of Mesopotamia. 
We may therefore connect the name of the Greek 
Achaeans, or Akkaians, with the name of the Akkadians, 
or Akkad, of Mesopotamia. The name given to the 
Greeks in the Homeric Poems is thus traced to the 
Iranian and Median Casdim, later Chalda3ans, who 


were cognate with the Akkad of Cuneiform Inscriptions, 
and who subjugated in the year B.C. 2458 the Sumir, 
the descendants of the builders of Babylon. 1 

Similar to the three tribes of Cretian Dorians, there 
were three tribes among the Spartans, it is said since 
Lycurgus, which, however, seem to have existed earlier, 
at least after the conquest of the Peloponnese, since we 
meet them everywhere among the Dorians. Probably 
the first tribe among the Spartans consisted exclusively 
of Dorians, even though at first some Achseans may 
have been reckoned to them for the sake of peace. It 
is said that Lycurgus granted to some Achseans the full 
rights of citizens, but that later they lost the political 
privileges. The second tribe, of the Perioeki, was formed 
probably by subjugated but free Achasans or Ionians, 
and the Helotes consisted of serfs, which class was 
added by the Doric conquests. The Thetes of earlier 
times, who for wages performed agricultural labours, 
were probably reckoned to the Helotes. The state- 
ment transmitted to us, may therefore be regarded as 

1 We have tried to render probable that the Oasdim of the family of the 
Akkad were a cognate race with the Hyksos, and also with the Keta, Ket, 
Seth (Ishita-Isatu). The same people ruled in Mesopotamia as Medes from 
2458 to 2334, then over part of Egypt as the twelfth dynasty, and 511 years 
as Hyksos over the whole of Egypt, from 2074 to 1563 ; finally, after a 
sojourn of twenty-nine years in Arabia, they again ruled in Mesopotamia as 
the 'Arabian' dynasty of Berosus,or the Canaanite dynasty of the Nabathaeans , 
from 1534 to 1289. {The Chronology of the Bible.) Probably, already 
during the Median dynasty, the Japhetic Casdim or Oheta, according to the 
10th chapter of Genesis, migrated from Mesopotamia to Asia Minor, the 
Black Sea, and the Lower Danube, to Thrace. Here dwelt, as aborigines, 
the Geta (Keta), who, according to statements of Herodotus, claimed to be 
descended from the Medes, thus from the Median Casdim, or Cheta, according 
to our ethnic scheme. Accordingly, the first immigrants of Greece, the 
Pelasgians (the P'lishti, or Whites, as Hitzig suggests), but in combination 
with non-Aryans, or Ilamites, ma} r have come from Thrace, and they may have 
been a cognate tribe with the Celts, who in divers ramifications spread over 
Europe and Northern Africa as mixed white and black tribes. The Celts in 
Britain were certainly a mixed race. According to this theory, the Casdim 
may have received the name Chaldaeans because, as Medes, they formed a 
mixed race. In Sanscrit ' kala' means ' black,' and Herodotus mentions Indian 
Callatians who ate their fathers (III. 38). 


historical, that the earliest quarrels took place between 
Doric conquerors and subjugated Ionians. 

The hypothesis that in the Trojan war the Dorians, 
though not unmixed, as Hellenes were opposed to the 
Ionians, is also confirmed by a few personal names 
which can be ethnically explained. The name Dar- 
danos, of the founder of the royal house of Troy, from 
whom the legend regards the Eomans as descended, is 
formed after the Aryan ' tartan ' or commander. Dar- 
danos is first named as chief of the people in the 
north-east of the Troas, and then is connected with the 
island Samothrake, the Samos of Homer, opposite Troy, 
and of Pelasgian (Ionic ?) origin. The island was the 
principal seat of the Kabirian mysteries, which were 
almost certainly connected with those of the Ionic 
Dodona. The name Dodona cannot be separated from 
the name Dodanim, of the son of Javan, according to 
Genesis, and brother of Elisha, which name Josephus 
uses for the designation of the iEolians or Ionians. 
According to the explanation of the Targumim and the 
Talmud, the Dodanim were identical with the Dar- 
danians, whereby the connection of the Trojans with 
the Ionians is confirmed, which latter were the allies of 
the former according to Herodotus. 

Again, the name Erechtheus or Erechthonius, is also 
the name of the first Athenian king, and points to 
Erech in Mesopotamia, which city was even more ancient 
than Babylon. The name of the Troic Assarakos 
corresponds with the Assyrian Assarak or Serak, a 
name for kings and gods. The name Hos must be 
connected with the divinity Illinos, and the latter with 
Bel-Hea-Aos, and thus with the third name of the 
Assyrian Trias, whom Damascius calls Aos. Finally, the 
name Laomedon literally means ' people of the Medes,' 
and thus seems to point to the Medes of Berosus, 
whose capture of Babylon in the year of Shem's birth, 
B.C. 2458, brought about the ethnical combination of 


Japhetites and Hamites, of the probable ancestors of 
Ionians and Dorians, which combination we call Semi- 

That the Trojans were a cognate race with the 
Ionians, and thus with the Japhetites of Genesis, the 
Iranians, is also confirmed by the fact that the Phrygians 
whom Attic poets and Eoman historians identify with 
the Trojans, are pointed out by Herodotus as a people 
essentially different from the Indians, and next to the 
latter as the more numerous. As with the Trojans, the 
Phrygians were cognate with the Thrakians, whom the 
Ionians called Thraekoi, with which the names Troas, Tros, 
and Teucri might have been connected. The Trojans 
and Phrygians, as Ionians or Javan, were Japhetites, 
and this is also confirmed by the connection of the 
Japhetic Tiras of Genesis with Thrace, according to 
the Targumim, Josephus, and Jerome, whilst Strabo 
actually designates the Thracians as Trojans and Pelas- 
gians. It has thus become probable at least, that in 
the Trojan war Indian Dorians, as Hellenes, opposed 
Iranic Ionians as Trojans. 

If the Ionian Homer cannot be separated from the 
Japhetites or Iranians, it follows that the name Homer 
must be connected with the Japhetic Javan (Ion), who 
in the 10th chapter of Genesis is designated as fourth 
son of Gomer, the eldest son of Japhet. Accordingly, 
not only the name Homer, but also that of the Homerides 
of Greece and of the family of singers in Arabia, the 
Gomeridse, would point to Gomer, the tribal father of 
the Japhetites. Apollos communicated to the tribes of 
seers the mysteries of Zeus about the past and the 
future. The families of seers were probably also the 
families of singers. The family of singers, or more 
probably the corporation or caste of Initiated in the 
mysteries of Ionic tradition and life, the guardians of 
the old and of the new treasure from the East, the 
Homeridas of Chios, will have to be connected with 


Homeric songs, as with the Ionic-Iranian tradition on 
which they are founded. Also in Bactria and India 
there were generations of singers ; and according to the 
most ancient tradition of the East-Iranians recorded in 
the Zendavesta, the God of light communicates his 
mysteries to some men through his Word, later through 
the mediation of Serosh, the Angel-Messiah. 

Homeric singers probably existed long before the 
Trojan war, and still in the sixty-ninth Olympiad, at the 
commencement of the Persian wars, Kynaethos is said 
to have sung Homeric poems in Syracuse and other 
places, the written record of which, in the form trans- 
mitted to us, might possibly not have taken place much 
before this time. The Homeridas are said to have been 
proud of their descent from Homer, and they may have 
connected, though not publicly, the poet's name with 
the representative name of Gomer. They could do this 
even without giving up the personality of the one poet. 
The name Homer has in Greek the meaning of one who 
rivets or unites what was separate, and it corresponds 
with the meaning of the name of the Rhapsodi. 

If the Ionic Homer can be regarded as representa- 
tive of Ionic and therefore Iranian traditions of which 
the Zendavesta is the most ancient record, the connec- 
tion is thereby confirmed of the Dorian Pythagoras 
with the essentially different Indian, though mixed 
Iranian tradition, with the Wisdom or Bodhi, which his 
contemporary Gautama-Buddha promulgated. Indeed, 
the name Pythagoras appears to be a combination of 
Put, Bud, Bod or Bodhi, and of ' guru,' which word in 
India was used for a teacher of the Veda ; so that the 
name Pythagoras may be interpreted ' teacher of the 
religion of Buddha.' This derivation must be preferred to 
the combination of an Indian and a Greek word, of Put 
and agoraios, one belonging to the market — an epithet 
of several gods. The market and Wisdom have been 
strangely connected in the partly late composed Book of 


Proverbs : * Wisdom crieth without, she uttereth her 
voice in the streets, she crieth in the chief place of 
concourse,' or, rather, ' in the market place.' * 

The connection of Pythagoras with the East, and 
with the Indian-Iranian Wisdom or Bodhi, which his 
contemporary Buddha promulgated, if proved, is of 
great importance, because Josephus compares the Essenic 
Therapeuts of Alexandria with the Pythagoreans, and 
because Essenic as also Pythagorean doctrines and 
rites can be proved to point back to Parsism and 

1 Prov. i. 20. 




Alexander, Asoka, and the Parthians, as pioneers of the Essenes — The three 
classes of the Magi and of the Rabbis — Daniel and the Magi or Chaldaeans 
— Probable Essenic origin of the Massora or Gnosis in Israel, and its in- 
troduction into the Septuagint. 

The Bridge between East and West. 

In a remarkable passage Philo connects the Essenic 
mode of life with that of the ascetics among the Magi 
and among the Indians. He states that in the land of 
the barbarians wise men are ' authorities, both as to 
words and actions,' and that there are ' very numerous 
companies of the Magi, who investigating the works of 
nature for the purpose of becoming acquainted with the 
truth, do at their leisure become initiated themselves, 
and initiate others, in the divine virtues by very clear 
explanations. And among the Indians there is the 
class of the gymnosophists (or ' naked wise men ') who, 
in addition to natural philosophy, take great pains in 
the study of moral science likewise, and thus make their 
whole existence a sort of lesson in virtue.' l These 
naked wise men were by the Indians called Vana- 
prasthas, or 'inhabitants of woods,' and they formed 
the third class of the Brahmans, the members of which 
had to give themselves up to the contemplation of the 
Deity, till purified from all terrestrial influences they 

1 Philo, Quod omnis jirobus, 11; comp. Clem. Al., Strom, i. 15; some of 
them ' neither inhabit cities, nor have roofs over them, but are clothed in 
the bark of trees, feed on nuts, and drink water in their hands. Like the 
Encratites, they know not marriage nor begetting of children.' 


can as Sanyasi return to the aboriginal source of exist- 
ence, the condition of release from matter, to the place 
where matter is annihilated, to the Nirvana of the 
Buddhists, which we tried to identify with the sun. 
This passage immediately precedes the account which 
Philo gives of the Essenes in Palestine and Syria, which 
countries, he says, 'are also not barren of exemplary 
wisdom and virtue,' and where lives that portion of the 
Jews whom he calls Essai, the Essenes of Josephus, whom 
he mentions by the side of Sadducees and Pharisees as 
forming the third party in Israel. Thus Philo connects 
indirectly the Essenes with East-Asiatic religions. 

This connection is confirmed by the austere life of 
the Essenes, resembling the asceticism of Brahmans, 
Jains, and Buddhists, as also that of the Magi. It be- 
comes probable that the Essenes introduced Oriental 
doctrines and customs into Judaism, since Pythagorsean 
asceticism and doctrines can likewise be connected with 
the East, and especially with the Indian Wisdom or 
Bodhi. Ever since Alexander's conquest of India, 
Eastern science could easily be imported into the West, 
and already three centuries earlier, Psammetick had 
opened the ports of Egypt to the world. The ' Tradition 
from beyond,' or the Wisdom from above which Gautama- 
Buddha promulgated, became patronised by the great 
king Asoka, after his conversion, probably from Jainism, 
in the tenth year of his reign. In the eighteenth year, 
about B.C. 258, he assembled a Buddhist council at 
Patna, and settled the Southern Canon. He sent a 
message to the general assembly of Magadha, preserved 
in the Bhabra edict, in which he expresses his ; respect 
and favour in Buddha, in the law, and in the assembly.' 
A distinction is then made in favour of the binding, 
because provable, authority of the words spoken by 
Buddha. ' Whatsoever (words) have been spoken by 
the Divine Buddha, they have all been well said, and in 
them verily I declare that capability of proof is to be 


discerned ; so that the pure law (which they teach) will 
be of long duration. These things, as declared by the 
Divine Buddha, I proclaim, and I desire them to be 
regarded as the precepts of the law.' ! It would have 
been impossible for Asoka to have addressed the repre- 
sentatives of Buddhism in such terms, transmitted to us 
by his stone-cut edicts, if authorised records of Buddha's 
words had not existed in his time. 

In the same year, B.C. 250, and under his auspices, 
the first eighteen Buddhist missionaries reached China, 
'where they are held in remembrance to the present 
day, their images occupying a conspicuous place in 
every large temple.' The board for foreign missions, 
established by Asoka, the Dharma-Mahamatra, 'sent 
forth to all surrounding countries enthusiastic preachers 
. . . supported by the whole weight of Asoka's political 
and diplomatic influence.' 2 Asoka's son, Mahinda, 
with others, went to "Ceylon during Tissa's reign in that 
island (250-230). The Society for the propagation of 
Buddhism in foreign lands must have imported written 
records of the words of Buddha. This assertion, based 
on the fact that the Bhabra edict of Asoka refers to 
existing records of words of Buddha, is confirmed by 
the reference in Chinese-Buddhist writings to Buddha's 
exhortation to his son against falsehood, to which Sutra 
Asoka's edict referred, in B.C. 250. 

The board for foreign missions in India must have 
directed its special attention to the independent Parthian 
kingdom. The same was established by Arsakes in the 
same year that Asoka established his foreign missions, 
and sent the first missionaries to China. The Parthian 
kingdom soon connected the Indus with the Euphrates, 
and thus formed an uninterrupted bridge from East to 

1 Professor Wilson's translation; see Thomas, I. c. 53 ; corap. Rhys 
Davids, 224. r J 

2 Eitel, Buddhism, second edition, pp. 19, 20. According to Rhys 
Davids, the Dharnia-Mahaniatra was the office of the chief minister of re- 
ligion ; I.e. 228. 


West for nearly 500 years. Asoka's missionary board 
had special reasons for sending its emissaries to the 
Parthians, if Gautama or Sakya-Buddha was a descen- 
dant from the kings of the Sakas. Like the name Asoka, 
or Chasoka, the name Arsakes, which is Asak without 
the liquid r, may be translated ' the strong one,' the 
holder, possessor, ruler, or conqueror, like the Hebrew 
Chasad and the title Darius, which, according to Hesy- 
chius, meant with the Persians ' the wise,' and with the 
Phrygians ' the holder.' The name Saka was still known 
as a royal title in India 200 years after Asoka. It is 
highly probable, if not certain, that, like the cognate 
Sakas, the Parthians were in part Aryans and Iranians. 
This is important, since the Buddhistic reform was based 
on Zoroastrian doctrines. 

The independent Parthian kingdom included the 
land on the lower Euphrates, or Chaldgea proper, of 
which the Median Casdim or conquerors had become 
possessed in the year B.C. 2458. Here, in the land of 
Abraham's birth, and where Daniel had been set over 
the Magi, Cyrus the servant of Ormuzd, and whom a 
prophet in Israel called the Anointed or the Messiah of 
God, permitted the Israelites to return to the land pro- 
mised to their fathers, and which was originally bordered 
by the Euphrates and the Nile. In this land of the 
Medes and Magi, whom Cyrus acknowledged in their 
position, Arsakes and his successors were surrounded 
by a senate of Magi. The Parthians were, there- 
fore, in a more or less direct connection with India 
and with Syria about a hundred years before the rise of 
the Maccabees and the organised body of Assida3ans, or 
Chassidim, the pious ones or saints. With these the 
Essenes have by many authorities been identified, whose 
existence as an order is first testified in the year B.C. 148. 
The Chassidim, or saints, are already mentioned in a 
Psalm written before the Captivity, and the passage is 
cited by the Maccabees, whose name lias been lately 


derived from Chabah, * to extinguish,' a very appro- 
priate title for the destroyers of idolatry. 1 

It seems to have been the introduction of an Indian 
element among the Medes or West-Iranians, whose 
priests were called Magi, which caused the separation 
of them from their Eastern brethren. Though the 
Magi were worshippers of Ormuzd, the god of light, 
and though they preserved the ancient dualistic sym- 
bolism of light and darkness, they introduced an austere 
life among the Iranians of the West which was quite 
contrary to the doctrines and customs of the Eastern 
Iranians. This asceticism, so similar to that of the 
Brahmans and Buddhists, led to the separation of nu- 
merous individuals, if not of a whole tribe, from the 
rest of the community ; they became ascetics for life. 
The similar and pre-Mosaic institution of the Nazarite 
or Nazirite for life among the Israelites, probably came 
to them through the Magi, who may have existed 
among the Medes or Chaldaeans already when they con- 
quered Mesopotamia, centuries before the birth of 

The spirit in which Asoka, the Constantine of 
Buddhism, desired his religious faith to be disseminated 
in India and in foreign countries is akin to the spirit of 
Him who, about 250 years later, instituted an apostolic 
propagation-society in Zion. The edicts of Asoka, cut 
in stones, are the earliest records of that universal or 
catholic religion of humanity which is wrongly as- 
sumed to have sprung up so suddenly and unconnect- 
edly in the West. Unlike other primitive religions, 
even that of Moses, Buddhism propagated in pre- 

1 Ps. lxxix. 2, 3 ; comp. cxxxii. 9 ; Dan. viii. 13; Mai. iii. 13 ; 1 Mace, 
vii. 17. Talm. Beracli. i. by the Wassikim or the pious ones probably refers 
to the Ohassidim as the Essenes. Dr. Ourtiss, of Leipzig, derives the 
Machabee of Jerome from Chabah. The probable connection of Mahomed as 
Hanyf or Sabean with the disciples of John, and thus with the Essenes, sug- 
gests a possible original reference of the Ohaaba at Mekka to the extinguish- 
ing of idolatry by Mahomed. 



Christian times more than a tribal morality connected 
with ritualism and a national deity. Buddhism was, 
certainly in the time of Asoka, not a religion of race, 
but a religion appealing to the conscience, a religion of 
' self-evidencing authority,' the religion of humanity. 
The enthusiasm with which it was propagated was 
tempered by a sincere regard for the religions of other 
nations. One of the rock-cut edicts dated the twelfth 
year of Asoka's reign has been deciphered as follows : * 
1 The beloved of the gods, King Eyadasi, honours all 
forms of religious faith, and no reviling or injury of 
that of others. Let the reverence be shown in such and 
such a manner as is suited to the difference of belief ; . . . 
for he who in some way honours his own religion and 
reviles that of others, saying : having extended to all 
our own belief, let us make it famous, he who does 
this, his conduct cannot be right.' The edict goes on 
to say : ' and as this is the object of all religions, with 
a view to its dissemination, superintendents of moral 
duty ' . . . are appointed. 

Although Asoka's grandfather, the adventurer of 
low birth, Tchandragupta, the Greek Sandracottos, 
who met Alexander on the banks of the Hyphasis in 
B.C. 325, had about ten years later driven the Greeks 
out of India, defeating Seleukos, the ruler of the Indus 
provinces, 2 yet Alexander's religious policy was quite 
in harmony with the enlightened spirit of Asoka. It is 
well known that the founder of Alexandria, of the 
intended metropolis of the Greek western empire, met 
the appeal of Aristotle, to treat the Greeks as freemen 
and the Orientalists as slaves, by the declaration, that 
he regarded it as his ' divine mission, to unite and 
reconcile the world.' It has been well said, that 
Alexander was not simply a Greek, and that he must 
not be judged by a Greek standard. ' The Orientalism 

1 Edward Thomas, Jainism, or the Early Faith of Asoka, p. 45. 
3 Rhys-Davids, Buddhism, 220. 


which was to his followers a scandal, formed an essen- 
tial part of his principles, and not the result of caprice 
or vanity. He approached the idea of a universal 
monarchy from the side of Greece, but his final object 
was to establish something higher than the paramount 
supremacy of one people. His purpose was to combine 
and equalise, not to annihilate ; to wed the East and the 
West in a just union.' 1 

Alexander found in Greek literature a deposit of 
Eastern science. We have no reason to doubt the 
early record of the doctrines which Pythagoras taught 
but probably did not record himself, nor is it possible 
to reject the well-attested tradition, that Philolaus, a 
Pythagorean philosopher in the time of Socrates (b.c. 
469-399), composed a work in three books containing 
doctrines of Pythagoras. This work Plato is said to 
have either bought himself from relatives of the philo- 
sopher in Sicily, or through Dion of Syracuse, who 
bought it from Philolaus. The contents of the greater 
part of Plato's ' Timeus ' are said to have been derived 
from this Pythagorean source, and the composition of 
the former probably took place within 60 to 80 years 
after the death of Pythagoras. Little more than 200 
years later, about B.C. 300, Megasthenes composed a 
work on India after his stay in that country, occa- 
sioned by Seleucus-Mcator having sent him as ambas- 
sador to Asoka's grandfather, Sandracottos. Although 
the original Pythagorean schools cannot be traced 
beyond the commencement of the fourth century B.C., 
it cannot be asserted that the Pythagorean tradition 
had at any time died out. Soon after the beginning of 
the last pre-Christian century a revival of it took place, 
in a probably enlarged and certainly more Eastern 
garb, under the name of Neo-Pythagoreanism, the 
first traces of which seem to point to Alexandria, 
though Cicero strove to connect Eoman with Pytha- 

1 Westcott, in Smith's Diet of the Bible : 'Alexander.' 
a 2 


gorsean science. In and near the city where the new 
Pythagorasanism probably originated, and about half a 
century earlier, the settlement of Therapeuts near 
Alexandria is attested. Again, it is Clement of Alex- 
andria, who first mentions Buddha by name, whose 
doctrines have provably influenced those of the Thera- 
peuts. It was not Hellenism, but Orientalism, which 
assimilated the Neo-Pythagorasan doctrines with those 
earlier established ones of the Therapeuts. Both drew 
from an Eastern, probably from a Buddhistic source, and 
this explains why the Therapeuts are by Josephus 
compared with the Pythagoreans. 

Daniel, the Magi, and the Rabbi. 

The foreign doctrines and rites which the Essenes 
have acknowledgedly introduced into Judaism can be 
shown to have stood in some connection with those of 
the Magi and with those of the Rabbinical schools. 
Thus may be explained the remarkable parallel be- 
tween the three classes of the Magi and the three 
classes of the Rabbi, which has been strangely over- 
looked. The Herbed or scholar corresponds as- exactly 
with the Rab, as the Maubed or master with the 
Rabbi, and the Destur-Maubed or perfect master with 
the Rabban or Rabboni. Daniel, the prophet, was set 
over all the Magi, and he may be identified with 
Daniel, the priest of the line of Ithamar, as is done in 
the addenda to the Book of Daniel in the Septuagint. 
This priest Daniel returned with Ezra in 515, if Arta- 
xerxes, or ' King of the Aryans,' is only another title 
for Darius, or the ' King ' Hystaspes. Also Mahomedan 
tradition makes Daniel the prophet die in Palestine, 
and, according to Rabbinical tradition, he was one of 
the members of the Great Synagogue under Ezra. 
Nebuchadnezzar can hardly have besieged Jerusalem 
and exported this Daniel in the third year of Jehoia- 


kirn, B.C. 609-608, even as vice-regent. 1 If this Daniel, 
whom we may distinguish from the one mentioned by 
Ezechiel, was not exported till 588 as a youth, he may 
well have returned 73 years later under Ezra, or the 
priest Daniel was a relative of the prophet. This is 
not unimportant as regards the connection between 
Eabbinical and Magian tradition, to which the parallel 
between the three classes of the Magi and those of 
the Eabbi unmistakably point. Even if the exported 
Daniel did not survive the time of the return, the 
tradition of his Chaldaean and Magian knowledge must 
have been transported to the Land of Promise. 

Daniel was of noble and probably of royal and 
Davidic descent, like Zerubbabel. If so, he was a 
descendant from Caleb the Kenesite, and his ancestors 
were non-Hebrews and strangers in Israel, like the 
Eechabites or Kenites, who inhabited the land before 
Abraham entered it, and who continued to live with 
the Israelites as strangers. By a possible ethnological 
scheme these naturalised strangers can be connected 
with the Chaldseans, Casdim or conquerors, with whom 
the forefathers of Abraham had lived in Ur of the 
Chaldees or Casdim. The pre-Abrahamitic Chaldgeans 
or conquerors of Mesopotamia cannot be distinguished 
without reason from the Medes who captured Babylon, 
according to Berosus, in B.C. 2458. These Medes may 
already at that time have called their priests Magi, and 
as in the Book of Daniel the Magi are identified with 
the Chaldseans, Daniel may be said to have been set 
over the descendants of those Medes who conquered 
Babylon about 500 years before the birth of Abraham 
in Ur of the Chaldees. Although Daniel had in 
Babylon to be taught the learning and the language of 
the Chaldaaans, yet this Aramaean language was known 
in the eighth century to such men as Eliakim, perhaps a 
high priest, and Shebna, the Scribe, and they may also 

1 Oomp. Jer. xxxvi. 1, 9, 29 ; xxv. 1 ; xlvi. 2. 


have known the wisdom or tradition of the Chaldgeans, 
Medes, or Magi. The non-Hebrew tradition, if not the 
language of the Medo-Chaldasan strangers in Israel, may 
therefore have been represented by the latter in every 
period of Hebrew history. Already 182 years after 
Abraham had left Ur for Haran, or in the year 
B.C. 1811, Laban, grandson of Nahor, who had remained 
in Ur, called the heap of stones by an Aramaean or 
Chaldasan name, whilst Jacob, Abraham's grandson,- 
gave it a Hebrew name. 

It must here suffice to state, that to the presence of 
two races in Israel, the Hebrew and the non-Hebrew or 
Chaldasan, may be referred the Elohistic and the Jeho- 
vistic records in Mosaic writings, and also the two 
rival high-priestly lines of Eleazar and Ithamar. The 
latter of these was in the time of Saul connected with 
the tribe of Judah, whilst its name points to Thamar, 
whom Philo calls a stranger. To this ethnic dualism 
in Israel may also be referred the two political parties 
of later times, the Sadducees and the Pharisees, the 
name of the latter having possibly been derived from 
Pharis (Faris) , the Arabian name for the Persians. 1 
Finally, with the two races in Israel may have stood in 
some possible connection the two chiefs of the Scribes, 
Sugoth or Ishkolin, later Katholikoi. These chiefs of 
the secret association of the Chaberim are, according 
to pre-Christian Jewish tradition, designated as recog- 

1 Oomp. Phares and Pharesites, or Pherisites (Perizzites). Phares was 
the son of a mixed marriage, which, by a figurative interpretation, may have 
been referred to the union of Hebrews and Kenites in Arad. As in the land 
of Faris the faras or horse of the Arabians was indigenous, which the ancient 
Babylonians called the ' animal of the East,' it is but natural to explain with 
Pott, the Hebrew words for the horse— sus, the driving horse, and parash, 
the riding horse, respectively with Susa and faras, though in Assyrian faras 
does not mean the horse, and its etymology is doubtful. In Egypt no 
reference to a horse was made before the Hyksos-rule. One of the Egyptian 
words for ' horse ' is sus, the other means 'tribute.' Both point to the importa- 
tion of the horse by the Hyksos, the Median conquerors, who, after their 
expulsion from Egypt, returned to Mesopotamia as the * Arabian ' dynasty 
of Berosus. {Chronology of the Bible.) 


nised organs of that verbal tradition, the Holy Mer- 
kabah, which Moses is said to have entrusted to 70 
elders, who transmitted it to the prophets and these to 
the members of the Great Synagogue. With the last 
surviving member of the latter, with Simon the Just 
(b.c. 348 ?), has been connected the transmitted list of 
pairs of Scribes down to Gamaliel. 1 

After the Captivity, not provably before the time 
of Herod, three classes of Rabbi were introduced, which 
form so remarkable a parallel with those of the Magi, 
that we are more and more entitled to assume, if not a 
connection, a common Oriental source for the Rabbi- 
nical or Synagogal and the Magian institution. It is 
remarkable that the introduction of the title Rabban or 
Rabboni, which presupposes the lower titles of Rabbi 
and of Rab, is by tradition connected with the contest 
between the pair of Scribes represented by Hillel ' the 
Babylonian,' or Chaldee, and Shammai, and that it was 
Simeon, the son of Hillel, and possibly the Simeon of 
the Gospel, who first received the title Rabban. The 
corresponding title of Destur-Maubed must have been 
given to Daniel as chief of the Magi, to which office the 
title Rab-Mag probably stood in some relation, which 
we find already in the Book of Jeremiah. The Rab- 
Mag was however a lower title than the Rab-Chartumim 
or Rabban, though it was a higher title than the Rab- 
signin. Rab was known to the Babylonians as Rabu, 
which, like the Hebrew Rab, meant ' great.' The word 
is as certainly Semitic or Median as Mag is Japhetic, 
Aryan, or pre-Semitic. The three years' noviciate which 
Daniel had to pass among the Magi can be compared 
to the four classes of initiation among the Brahmans 
and the Essenes, since the latter, like the Magi, had 
a double noviciate. A similar institution were the 
four Rabbinical stages of purity, and the secret associa- 
tion of the Chaberim or Scribes may have also been so 

1 Neh. viii. 13 : Zohar iii. 157 ; Ecclus. 1. 1 ; Pirke-Aboth, 1. 


classed. A more direct confirmation of the Oriental 
and West-Iranian or Magian source of the Syna- 
gogue may be derived from the implied fact, that only 
the Scribes and Pharisees visited the Temple as well as 
the synagogues, where they strove to occupy the first 
seats, whilst the Sadducees are never mentioned as 
attending them. This fact is all the more significant 
since the Sadducees forbad the Pharisees the open pro- 
mulgation of the tradition of ' their ancestors,' and 
since the former originated the persecution of Stephen 
and of those of his followers who called themselves 

The principles of the Synagogue : universal priest- 
hood, self-responsibility, absence of bloody sacrifices, are 
of Iranian origin. Opposed to them are the principles of 
the Temple : hereditary priests as trustees of religious 
mysteries, as sole proprietors of the key of knowledge, 
as a conscience-guiding authority, connected with cere- 
monial observances and bloody sacrifices, all of which 
are provably of Indian origin. The figurative or alle- 
gorical interpretation of the letter, the most fruitful of 
the principles of the Synagogue, was a necessary conse- 
quence of the Sadducean prohibition to promulgate 
openly the ancestorial tradition of the Pharisees. Yet 
these and the Scribes, not the Sadducees, were said by 
Jesus to be, and thus to have continued, in the seat of 
Moses, as guides whose directions were to be followed. 

The Massora, the Targumim, and the Essenes. 

We have no right to discard as pure invention the 
tradition of the Pirke-Aboth or words of the Fathers, 
about the verbal tradition or Massora, transmitted since 
Moses. It helps us to throw light on the Hebrew and 
the non-Hebrew or Kenite tradition, of both of which 
we may regard Moses the Hebrew to have been the 
depositor, since he was acquainted with all the know- 


ledge of the Egyptians. The Kenite tradition was that 
of his father-in-law, but in Israel it was the tradition 
of the stranger and thus of the minority. Yet Moses 
seems to have interwoven the Jehovistic records of the 
Iranian Kenites with the Elohistic records of the Indian 
Hebrews. Later revisions certainly took place, and 
made the legal distinctions between the Hebrew and the 
stranger more severe. If we were to assume, that 

o 7 

Moses himself did forbid the marriage of Hebrews and 
Moabites, Boaz could never have married Euth, and 
thus the ancestry of David would be connected with an 
illegal practice. 

It is the theory of a verbal tradition among the 
Jews since Mosaic times, which alone seems fully to 
explain the origin and the character of the Targumists 
or Massoretes, and the relation of these interpreters of 
Scripture with the Scribes, who are in the New Testa- 
ment designated as trustees of the tradition, and who 
certainly cannot have been mere copyists or counters of 
letters, or inventors of vowel-points. Although the 
vowel-points hitherto known are of post-Christian 
origin, a new set of vow el-points, differing from the 
former, has been lately discovered, and it is held as 
probable that they are more ancient. 1 Long before 
Ezra, vowel-points may have been known to the Scribes 
and elders as guardians of tradition. By the theory of 
a hidden wisdom the entire Eabbinical literature, which 
ended in the Talmud, can be better explained than by 
the assumption that, some time after the Eeturn from 
Babylon, interpretations of Scripture had become neces- 
sary merely because of the Hebrew-Chaldean or Ara- 
maic dialect, which was not generally understood. In 
this uniformly degraded language, in which only one 
verse in the Book of Jeremiah has been written, all the 
Scriptures from and after the time of Haggai, the Book 
of Daniel included, have been composed. Not so much 

1 This is Mr. Ginsburg's opinion. 


the Chaldsean language as the Chaldsean wisdom required 
interpretation. The latter enabled the Targumists to 
harmonise the Hebrew and the Chaldgean meaning of 
the word, and thus also the two traditions. It is quite 
possible, that the Targumists were bound by a tradi- 
tional canon of interpretation, transmitted since the 
time of Moses, if not from earlier times, and represent- 
ing essentially the tradition of the strangers in Israel, 
particularly of the Medo-Chaldseans or Chasdim. 

We shall connect the foreign or non-Hebrew doc- 
trinal element, which was provably represented by the 
Essenes, with the mixed tradition of the Magi or 
priests of the Chalclseans, and especially with Buddhism, 
the asceticism of which was so similar to that of the. 
Magi. The Medo-Chaldasans, like the Scribes and like 
the Assidseans and Essenes, formed a corporation, the 
members of which, we may assume, were initiated in 
the mysteries of ancestorial tradition. With the Assi- 
dseans or Chassidim, the pious ones or the saints, who 
were established as an order before the Maccabean 
rising, the Essenes have been very generally identified. 1 
Even the name Essenes, like that of the Assidgeans, can 
have been derived from the Hebrew Chassin, and Philo 
connects their name with their holy life. It is certain 
that the name Essenes was connected with the Magi, 
since the Megabyzi among the Magi, that is, the circum- 
cised Curette or Corybanthians, the priests of Artemis 
(Cybele, Ishtar, Diana), which successors of Corybas 
represented Cabirian mysteries, are by Pausanias called 
Essenaenes. 2 The Essenes, and no doubt also the Eabbis 
with their three classes, stood in connection with the 
Medo-Chaldoean or Magian institution, and formed a 
link between Babylon and Jerusalem. The provable 
connection of the Jewish books of the Captivity and 
Return, as also of the most ancient paraphrases or Tar- 

1 Thus by Rappaport, Frankel, Jost, Ewald, and Ginsburg. 

2 Paus. viii. 3, 1 ; Clem. Alex. Exort. 2. 


gumim with Iranian tradition, obliges us to assume 
either the importation of entirely new doctrinal elements 
into the Israelitic community, or a verbal tradition or 
Massoret, transmitted possibly since the times of Moses, 
if not of Abraham, as the tradition of the Medo- 
Chaldsean stranger in Israel, developed and partly pub- 
lished after the Eeturn from Babylon. The promulgation 
of more or less new doctrines in Israel after the Eeturn 
from Babylon is a fact, and it is probable at the outset, 
that with this doctrinal development, the provable 
introduction of non-Hebrew doctrines and customs into 
Israel by the Essenes, stood in some connection. 

The Mosaic Scriptures, said to have been lost during 
the Captivity, were recomposed in the Aramaic lan- 
guage on the Eeturn from Babylon, or about a thousand 
years after Moses. Even then the Hebrew Scriptures 
could not have conveyed to the people a fixed meaning, 
unless we assume, that already Ezra introduced vowel- 
points. Not until the time of the Captivity and the 
Eeturn, can the introduction of the words Shemeh, or 
name, formed by transposition after the mysterious 
Chaldsean Sehem, and Memra, Word of God, be proved 
in Hebrew writings, where they are substituted for 
Jehova. Yet we find both these words in the Mosaic 
writings as transmitted to us. 1 This is all the more 
remarkable, since in the Book of Exodus the ' Name ' of 
God is connected with the Angel of God, as the ' Word ' 
of God is connected with man. The most ancient 
Targumim, perhaps composed soon after the Eeturn, 
and partly edited in Babylon, not only constantly change 
the name of Jehova into Memra or Word, or into 
Shechina or glory, but Memra was the designation of 
the Angel of God in whom, according to Exodus, is the 
Name of God. 2 Thus the two new expressions for 

2 Lenormant, Chaldean Magic (Cooper's edition), p. 42, where Shemeh 
ought to stand for Memra. 


Jehova, whether or not they had been transmitted as 
Mosaic verbal tradition, and which were exceptionally 
inserted in the Scriptures bearing the name of Moses, 
have been some time after the Eeturn from Babylon 
connected with the Messiah as the Angel of God. It 
was easier to do so, since the Messiah was by Malachi 
designated as a messenger or Maleach, which word has 
also the meaning of angel. 

The promulgation of new names for the Deity after 
the Eeturn from Babylon, and through Hebrew Scrip- 
tures, must be connected with the first introduction of 
the doctrine of angels among the people of Israel. 
Although the party of the Sadducees cannot be traced 
till after the Captivity, yet they must have represented 
a very ancient tradition, which seems to have been con- 
nected with that Elohistic stream which the ethnic 
dualism in Israel perhaps enables us to connect with 
India. The Sadducees did not believe in angels or 
spirits, according to Josephus. They must have there- 
fore either known nothing of an early insertion of the 
doctrine of angels into Mosaic Scriptures, or they must 
have disbelieved a doctrine which the lawgiver himself 
had promulgated by what he wrote. In either case 
the Sadducees would make use of their power to forbid 
the Pharisees to promulgate the tradition of their fore- 
fathers, as Josephus asserts they did. This tradition of 
the Pharisees must have included the belief in angels, 
for otherwise the Sadducean unbelief in this doctrine, 
with which that of the resurrection and future judg- 
ment was closely connected, would not have been men- 
tioned as a peculiarity of their religious system. The 
ancestral tradition of the Pharisees, including the doc- 
trine of angels, may be with increasing certainty con- 
nected with Persia, the Pilaris of the Arabians, and 
from which name that of the Pharisees may have been 
derived. For the doctrine of angels was first intro- 
duced and developed by the Iranians, and their tradition 


was represented by the Magi in Mesopotamia, by the 
Buddhists in India, and probably by the Essenes in 
Palestine and Egypt. 

The secret tradition, Massora or Gnosis of the Jews, 
later called Kabbala, was certainly not derived from 
Greek philosophy ; but it can be connected with the 
secret tradition of the Essenes, and thus with the 
Medes and Chaldasans of pre-Abraharnitic times, as also 
with Parsism and Buddhism. A connection can be 
established between the Book of Daniel, the Targumim, 
the Apocrypha of the Septuagint and the whole Apoca- 
lyptic literature. The doctrinal development repre- 
sented by these Scriptures is essentially Essenic. 

Essenic Doctrines in the Septuagint. 

Whilst the Essenic dogma in many respects can be 
compared with that of the Sadducees, it certainly 
differed from the latter as regards angels, the names of 
which the Essene had to swear to keep secret. At the 
time when the Essenic corporation can be proved to 
have existed, about the middle of the second century 
before the commencement of the Christian era, the 
introduction of the doctrine of angels, and even of a 
hierarchy of angels, imported from Babylon, together 
with the Essenic doctrine of the eternal punishment 
of wicked souls, had taken place. We find it in the 
canonical Hebrew and Greek Scriptures of the Jews, in 
neither of which there is a trace of doctrinal Greek 
influence, and also in the most ancient Targumim. In 
the earlier books of the Septuagint, published from and 
after B.C. 280, the word ' angel ' or ' angels ' is substi- 
tuted for Jehova, just as, in the pre-Christian Targumim, 
Memra, the ' Word,' Shechina, the 'glory,' 'and the 
Angel of the Lord' are substituted for Jehova, and 
referred to the Messiah. 

The connection of the Septuagint and its Apocrypha 


not known to the Hebrew canon, with the most ancient 
Targumim, partly edited in Babylon, perhaps soon 
after the return of some Jews to Jerusalem, is of the 
utmost importance, because the time of publication of 
the Septuagint is settled beyond doubt. Therefore a 
review of the doctrines in the latter must precede a 
consideration of the Messianic passages in the Tar- 
gumim. The Greek canon was composed in all its 
parts a few years before the actual attestation of the 
Essenic order, which was preceded by the similar 
order of the Assidseans or Cassidim, even assuming 
that both were not identical. The more the Essenes, 
with whom we may safely connect the Eechabites, 
can be connected with the Magian and Buddhistic 
doctrines and rites, the more certain will it become' 
that this third and independent party among the Jews 
introduced Eastern elements, some of them pre- 
Buddhistic, and among these the doctrine of the Angel- 
Messiah. With such pre-Christian mysticism, deeper 
knowledge or Gnosis, the composition of the Septuagint 
must be connected. This can be proved to demonstra- 
tion from the Essenic point of view, by a brief analysis 
of the new and characteristic features of the Greek- 
Jewish Scriptures, which are about a thousand years 
more ancient than the first manuscript of the Hebrew 
Scriptures transmitted to us. 

The account given by Philo about the composition 
of the Septuagint is all the more important for the 
critical but impartial inquirer, because its conclusion 
did not take place till his lifetime, if the learned 
Jerome was right in believing that one of the 
Apocrypha, called the Wisdom of Solomon, had Philo 
for its author. 1 Philo's near relation to, if not connec- 

1 Jer. Praef. in lib. Sal. ' Nonnulli scriptorum veterum hunc esse Judaei 
Philonis affirmant.' Luther accepted this view. If we can connect Philo 
with the Therapeuts living near the town of his birth, the view of Eichhorn, 
Zeller, and Jost about the author being a Therapeut coincides with the tra- 
dition transmitted by Jerome. The same would be the case if Apollos were 
regarded as its author (Noack, Plumptre, and others), as also of the Epistle 


tion with, the Essenic Therapeuts of Egypt, especially 
of Alexandria, is certain. The Essenes are by Philo 
stated to have asserted the principle of a continued and 
gradually revealing Divine inspiration, and thus of a 
higher stage of revelation than that conveyed by the 
letter of the revered Mosaic Scriptures. Philo believed 
that the Hebrew Scriptures ' had been divinely given by 
direct inspiration,' and that they who composed them 
' prophesied like men inspired.' The Essenes studied, 
according to Philo's statement, ' the sacred oracles of 
God enunciated by the holy prophets.' But the Essenes 
held, that the prophets of the past had written in such 
a manner that prophets of the future might find out 
6 the invisible meaning concealed under and lying 
beneath the plain words.' The light of the secret 
meaning thus revealed, was not only assumed to come 
from the same Divine source which inspires the prophets 
of all ages, but Philo designates it as a higher stage of 
inspiration, so much higher as the soul is with regard 
to the body, with which he compares the law. In con- 
nection with the views thus enunciated by Philo with 
regard to the inspired and prophetic character of the 
Hebrew Scriptures, he declares, that he considers the 
composers of the Septuagint version ' not mere inter- 
preters but hierophants (the word taken from the first 
priest of the Eleusinian mysteries) and prophets, to 
whom it had been granted, with their honest and guile- 
less minds, to go along with the most pure spirit of 

The question whether the Septuagint is faithful in 
substance cannot be better answered than by the light 
which Paul throws on the inspiration of the Scriptures, 
especially of the Greek text, which he almost invariably 
prefers to quote, as Jesus is likewise reported to have 
done in his sayings. The Septuagint is as faithful to 

to the Hebrews, which we shall explain by a development of Faulinic 


6 the letter that killeth,' as it is possible with due regard 
to the spirit which ' giveth light ' and which inspired 
its writers, according to Philo's testimony. Nor does 
Philo stand alone in this view of the higher standard of 
inspiration as conveyed by the Septuagint. For Jerome, 
the Father who cites the ancient tradition which attri- 
butes the Book of Wisdom to Philo, clearly implies, that 
the translators were divinely moved to add to the 
original and thus to perforin the office of prophets, 
giving a new revelation by every addition as well as by 
all their deviations from the Hebrew text. By so doing 
they acted in harmony, not with the letter, but with 
4 the most pure spirit of Moses,' according to Philo's 
words. 1 If it were argued that he had no authority for 
saying so, there would remain unexplained the confirma- 
tion of this view by the learned Jerome, and the more 
general testimony of Irenaeus and Augustine as to the 
Divine inspiration of the Septuagint, confirmed as it was 
by the citations in the New Testament. 

The Essenic and Philonian, the Targumistic and 
Paulinian doctrine of inspiration, according to which 
fiery sparks of the spirit were to be produced from the 
letter as from the flint, is indirectly confirmed by the 
deeper and spiritual sense which the transmitted parables 
of Jesus convey. He taught the mysteries of the 
spiritual kingdom to a few only when he was alone 
with them, not within hearing of the spies who were 
watching him, and of those whose predecessors in office 
had ' taken away the key of knowledge.' The preaching 
of Jesus and the Gospel which Paul preached are by 
the Apostle declared to centre in the revelation of a 
mystery kept ' in silence,' in the revelation of ' the 
hidden wisdom.' Origen writes : ' If we were obliged 

1 Philo, Be Vita Mosis, ii. G, 7 ; August. Praef. in Pared, i. col. 1419 ; 
Prolog, in Genesin, i. Canon and Professor Selwyn denies this conclusion, 
in Smith's Diet, of the Bible, ' Septuagint.' He says : ' The Septuagint is the 
image of the original seen through a glass not adjusted to its proper focus.' 


to keep to the letters, and to understand what is 
written in the law according to the manner of the Jews 
or of the people, I would blush to proclaim loudly my 
belief, that it is God who has given these laws ; in that 
case the laws of men, as, for instance, those of the 
Eomans, Athenians, and Lacedemonians, would appear 
better and more reasonable.' In another passage Orio-en 
says : 4 I believe that everybody must regard these 
things as figures, under which a secret meaning lies 
hidden.' Paul accuses Moses of having hidden. 1 

It may be said against this scheme of a hidden 
wisdom, which cannot be proved to have existed till 
after the return from Captivity, that its connection 
with a verbal tradition entrusted by Moses to the elders 
is non-proven. Yet Philo, the Essenes, the Targumists, 
and probably the early Christians, explained the doctrinal 
development in the Scriptures by the gradual proclama- 
tion of mysteries which the Initiated handed down since 
the time of Moses. They all believed in a new inspiration, 
and seem to imply, that it took cognisance of the capa- 
bilities and of the exigencies of advanced times, and 
particularly of the contact of Israel with other nations, 
with the East. The more that the connection of 
Essenic doctrines and rites with the Magi and Buddhists 
can be established, the more certain will it become, 
that the deeper knowledge or gnosis of pre-Christian 
times, which the Essenes and Eabbis represented, can 
only then lay claim to revelation, if Zoroaster, Moses, 
and Buddha are regarded as organs of the same reveal- 
ing Spirit of God. This is done by men like Clement of 
Alexandria, Origen, and Augustine ; the latter saying, 
that what is called Christian doctrine was earlier known 
under different names. On this assumption it could be 
asserted, that those who composed the Septuagint, 
writing as divinely inspired prophets, acted in harmony 

1 Orig. Homiil. 7, in Lcvit. ; Huet, Origeniana, 167; 2 Cor. iii. 12-18 • 
iv, 1-3. 



with the pure spirit of Moses. The Essenic theory of 
inspiration is, in fact, of the same nature as the Eab- 
binical theory, possibly of later origin, that from the 
time of Moses to that of Ezra elders and prophets had 
been in possession of a verbal tradition which was 
not promulgated in Israel till after the Eeturn from 
Babylon. The belief in a continuous inspiration suffices 
to account for the claim of Divine authority for books 
showing studied and systematic deviations from those 
transmitted as Mosaic. If Moses could not put an end 
to the generally prevailing system of hiding, he could 
hardly have deviated from the universal custom of 
initiation in mysteries. Some of the new productions in 
the Greek Canon were called Apocrypha or ' hidden,' and 
are published under fictitious names, apparently with a 
view to invest them with a Divine authority. 

The Book of Wisdom, falsely and intentionally 
attributed to Solomon, must be regarded, with Basil 
and Jerome, as the work of Philo, the only person to 
whom the authorship is assigned. Jerome was the con- 
temporary of the church-historian Eusebius ; and they 
both attest, the one in direct connection with the first 
stay of Peter at Eome, that in this city, where Jerome 
received his earliest education, and where he was later 
appointed as teacher, Peter met Philo of Alexandria. 
They imply, that this happened a.d. 42, which is also 
the year mentioned in the Pseudo-Clementines as the year 
when the Apostle first reached Eome. This informa- 
tion is strikingly confirmed by the fact, that Philo 
describes his being in Eome in 41, and gives reasons for 
assuming that he was there the next year also. 1 Philo 
and Peter are said to have had ' familiar conversation ' 
in Eome. Eusebius regards this as ' not at all impro- 
bable,' since in his writings Philo not only ' describes 
with the greatest accuracy the lives of our ascetics, that 
is, of the Therapeutic,' but also ' extolled and revered 

1 E. de Bunsen, The Chronology of the Bible, 81. 


the apostolic men of his day.' It is in direct connection 
with this statement, that Eusebius refers to the ' highly 
probable ' utilisation of Therapeutic Scriptures in our 
Gospels and Pauline Epistles, especially in the Epistle to 
the Hebrews. 1 And yet Philo, with whom Peter had 
familiar intercourse, is said, on the most ancient 
authority, to have composed the Book of Wisdom, with 
which the Epistle to the Hebrews (by Apollos) is un- 
questionably connected, although the Philonian work, 
by the general tenour of its teaching, excludes the car- 
dinal doctrines of ' Christianity,' the incarnation, atone- 
ment, and the resurrection of the body. 

The counter-argument, that the doctrinal character 
of the Book of Wisdom is ' foreign to the pure Hebrew 
mode of thought,' 2 may be at once dismissed, if a 
pre-Christian gnosticism can be proved, which Philo 
adopted. As this Essenic and Eastern gnosis was based 
on the doctrine of two worlds with its respective rulers, 
of which there is no trace in Israel before the Captivity, 
it is a striking confirmation of the Philonic authorship, 
that in the Book of Wisdom the personal devil, or Satan, 
the serpent, is mentioned, whilst the Wisdom of God, 
though identified with the Spirit of God, is personified 
in the other Apocrypha, in Ecclesiasticus or the Book of 
Sirach, and in the Book of Proverbs closed at an inde- 
finite time. The identity of personified Wisdom with 
the Spirit of God, of the supermundane creation of God 
with the Spirit brooding over the waters, renders futile 
all subtle arguments about a possible distinction 
between the personified Word of God and the personi- 
fied Wisdom of God, as respectively representing ' the 
mediative element in the action of God ' and that ' of 
his omnipresence.' Fire was the symbol of the Spirit 
of God, and thus of Wisdom ; and as in the Book of 
Wisdom the Almighty Word of God is compared to 

1 Ens. H.E., ii. 17. 

3 Canon Westcott, in Smith's Diet, of the Bible. 
h 2 


lightning, so in the same Scripture the fiery and brazen 
serpent is explained as the symbol of the word of God, 
' which healeth all things,' as ' the Saviour of all,' who 
had already preserved Adam and brought him out of 
his fall. 1 

The Wisdom of God is only another name for the 
Word of God ; and the personification of this premun- 
dane Saviour may be identified with the Angel of God, 
whom Philo designates in other writings as the com- 
panion of the human soul, and at the same time as 
God's Firstborn and God himself. 

Yet in the Book of Wisdom no incarnation of this 
Angel-Messiah is announced. This may be explained 
by the secret tradition of the Therapeuts. No more is 
said, than that through the Wisdom of God pious souls 
in all ages are made ' sons of God and prophets.' These 
are the expressed Messianic views of Philo, who per- 
sonifies the Word of God or Messiah, though he never 
refers even to an expected Messiah, and no more than 
John the Baptist (the Essene) regarded his contem- 
porary Jesus as the fulfilment of such expectations. 
This cannot be a mere chance, since even Josephus, 
probably for three years an Essene, avoids the Messianic 
doctrine, perhaps because as an Essene he had pro- 
mised not to divulge it. The combination of the Phil- 
onic, and, as we shall see, Essenic conception of an 
Angelic Messiah and Son of God with the Hebrew con- 
ception of a human Messiah and son of David, a com- 
bination which meets us in the Septuagint, seems at the 
outset to have been effected by the Essenes or Thera- 
peuts of Alexandria. In order to have some ground to 
claim the authority of Moses for their new theory of an 
Angel-Messiah, they would so render those passages 
which Hebrews might possibly regard as prophecies of 
an anointed Man, that such interpretation should by the 

1 Prov. viii. 22, 31 ; Ecclus. xxiv.; Wisd, ix. 17 ; vii. 27 ; xvi. 0, 7, 12 ; 
xviii. 15. 


new text be excluded, and that the more perfect or 
gnostic text should point to the Oriental and Essenic 
conception of an anointed Angel. 

The personified Wisdom or Word of God, as 
described in the Apocrypha of the Septuagint, is by the 
most ancient Targumim identified with the Angel of 
God who followed Israel in the wilderness, which Angel 
is by Stephen and by Paul, almost in the same words, 
applied to Jesus Christ, the Angel-Messiah. According 
to the Targum called after Onkelos, it was ' the thought 
or Word of God ' who ' created man in his own image, 
in an image which was (stood or sat) before God.' 
Again, it was the personified thought or Word of God 
who said to Adam : 'The world which I have created 
lies before me, darkness and light He before me.' The 
Word of God said : ' Adam whom I have created is 
now alone in this world, as I am (alone) in the highest 
heaven.' Thus it was the Word or Memra, the Angel 
of God, who created Adam. 1 

According to the pre-Christian Targumim, called 
after Jonathan, it was not God who was with the lad 
Ishmael, but the Word of God was aiding him ; the 
' voice of the Word ' was heard by Adam and Eve in 
Eden ; the glory of God went up from Abraham ; the 
personified Word came to Abimelech, to Jacob in 
Bethel, to Moses on Sinai ; the Divine presence, or 
Shechina, is in heaven and reigns below, and it is by 
the Targumist identified with the Angel of God who 
went before and followed Israel in the wilderness. 
Again, the passages about Shiloh, about Judah's sceptre, 
and the star of Jacob, are Messianically interpreted. 2 In 
the Targum after Jonathan the Maleach, or messenger, 
in the Book of Malachi is described as an Angel, as a 
celestial and premundane being, hidden from the eyes 
of men till born at Bethlehem. The two natures of the 

1 Targ. Onk. Gen. ii. 27 ; iii. 9 ; iv. 22, &c. 

2 Gen. xlix. 10 ; Num. xxiv. 17. 


celestial and the terrestrial Messiah are kept distinct. 
' My Word ' rejoiced over 'my servant the Messiah.' 
Among the seventeen passages which in this Targum 
are explained Messianically, is also the one about the 
serpent-bruiser. The Bereshith-Eabba, a record of 
ancient tradition published in the sixth century a.d., 
explains the Spirit over the waters as the Messiah of 
the future world, who sits at the right hand of God. 
It is stated there that the Messiah has been ' with the 
Church in the wilderness,' as ' Eock of the Church of 
Zion.' l 


The argument which runs through this Chapter is 
the following. Philo, the earliest and highest authority 
for all we know about the Essenes, connects them, at 
least indirectly, with East-Asiatic religions. Like the 
Pythagoreans, the Essenes may have derived their 
peculiar doctrines directly from the East. Psammetick, 
Alexander, and Asoka had paved the way for such 
direct transmission, and the Parthian kingdom had ever 
since B.C. 250 established a bridge between East and 
West. The remarkable parallel between the three 
classes of the Magi and the three classes of Eabbi shows, 
that after the Eeturn from Babylon close relations were 
established between the land of the Jews and the land 
of the Magi. The connection of Daniel with the Magi, 
their identification with the Chaldaeans, the prophet's 
probable return under Ezra, and the almost certain 
foreign origin of the synagogues, throw some light on 
the important period of Jewish captivity in Babylon. 
If the naturalised stranger in Israel, to whom the 
Eechabite and Essene belonged, at least since the time 
of Moses, was descended from the Medo-Chaldgeans, who 
lived in Abraham's native city of Ur, the verbal tradi- 

1 Tarq. Jon. to Isaiah xlii. 11, 1, and xv. 1 ; comp. Acts vii. 37, 38 ; 
1 Cor. x. 1-4. 


tion of the Jews, the Mass or a, said to have been trans- 
mitted ever since Moses, and perhaps identical with 
the ancestral tradition of the Essenes, which they kept 
secret, and of the Pharisees, to whom the Sadducees 
did not permit its promulgation among the people, this 
verbal tradition among Israelites may be connected 
directly or indirectly with the East. The non-Hebrew 
doctrinal element which the Essenes represented can 
clearly be traced to Parsism and Buddhism ; and the new 
words and doctrines introduced into Hebrew Scriptures 
after the Return from Babylon, as also the doctrinal de- 
velopment in the Targumim, in the Septuagint, and 
in the canonical and non-canonical Apocalypses, is best 
explained by the spread of Ess enic influence in Palestine 
and Egypt. 

The Essenes believed in Angels, and they also may 
have believed in an Angel-Messiah. If so, they were 
bound not to reveal anything with regard to their 
Messianic expectations, of which, in fact, nothing has 
been transmitted to us before the time of Elkesai, about 
100 a.d. This leads us to assume, at the outset, that 
the Essenes, according to their secret tradition, and 
thus before the time of Elkesai, member of their sect, 
expected as Messiah an incarnate Angel. 




Messianic conceptions in East and West — The anointed Angel and the 
anointed Man— Essenic expectation of an Angel-Messiah — The Eastern 
source of that and similar doctrines explains the parallels between the 
earliest Buddhistic and the earliest Christian records — When was the doc- 
trine of the Angel-Messiah applied to Jesus Christ, as it had been ap- 
plied to Gautama-Buddha ? 

Messianic Conceptions in East and West. 

In the most ancient parts of the Zendavesta the one 
God Ahura Mazda or Ormnzd is designated as the first 
of seven angels or watchers, in conjunction with whom 
he created the world by his word. 1 But by later 
passages in the holy book of the Iranians the honour of 
the first of seven angels is attributed to a vicar of God, 
to a mediator, to a divine messenger or angel, to 
Sraosha. This ideal hero and Messiah of Iranian tradi- 
tion was originally connected with fire, and thus, with 
the seven stars of the Pleiades, from which a divine 
messenger, the Matarisvan, according to Indian tradition, 
brought down the fire, as already pointed out. Fire 
was the symbol of the spiritual power, the Megh or 
Meh of the Zendavesta, the Mah or Maha in Sanscrit, 
and the Maya of Buddhism. This divine messenger and 
importer of fire, and of the spirit symbolised by fire, 
was called Agni, whose secret name was Matarisvan, the 
heavenly man from the Pleiades in Taurus, the throne 

1 In Genesis Jehovah is recorded to have said, as is implied, to some 
angels surrounding him : ' Let us make man in our image, after our like- 
ness.' According to the Targum, this was said to the Word. 


of the God of seven stars, of Indra, the celestial bull, as 
of Osiris, of Zeus-Chronos, of the Sibut of the ancient 
Babylonians, the Sebaot or Sabaoth of the Hebrews, 
and so also of other deities. We pointed out that Zeus- 
Chronos, the creator of fire, and whose seven sons may 
be connected with the Pleiades, in order to frame the 
world, according to Greek theogony, transformed him- 
self into Eros, the god of love, who became the vicar of 
Zeus and the framer of the world. Eros stands in the 
same relation to Zeus that Serosh stands to Ormuzd ; and 
the Eros of the Greeks may safely be identified with 
the Serosh or Sraosha of the Zendavesta. 

It thus becomes probable that the West-Iranians, 
the Chaldeans, Casdim, or conquerors of Mesopo- 
tamia, in B.C. 2458, the year of Shem's birth, that 
those whom Berosus calls Medes — and who may already 
then have had Magi — introduced into the West the 
doctrine of the Angel-Messiah. At all events not long 
after, if not ever since this Median conquest by the 
Casdim or Chaldaeans, whom we regard as the Shemites 
of Genesis, the ancient Babylonians knew of such a 
celestial being who distributed good among men, as his 
name, Silik-mulu-dug (khi ?) implies. 1 He is said to 
walk before or to be the forerunner, the messenger, of 
Hea, who is provably the God in the Pleiades, like the 
Sibut of the Babylonians. 2 As was done by the Agni of 
the Indians, this Angel-Messiah of Mesopotamia was 
connected with the Arani or fire-sticks. 

A mediatorial position similar to that assigned to 
Serosh was held by Mithras, who was first connected 
with fire and then with the sun. Like Ormuzd, Mithras 
is represented riding on the bull, and Jehovah is described 
as riding on the Cherub, Kirub or bull. This bull is 
certainly the constellation of Taurus ; and the same 
Mithraic representation connects with the bull a scor- 

1 Die Plejaden, 176. 

3 Lenorruaut, Magic, translated and edited by B. Cooper. 


pion, evidently the opposite constellation. Also the 
Hebrews knew traditions according to which the Memra 
or Word of God, the Messiah, was symbolised first by 
fire, that is, by the fiery or brazen serpent, which 
probably pointed to lightning, and later the Hebrews 
symbolised the Word by the sun. 

The transition from fire-symbolism to sun-symbolism 
took place in early historical times. The seven stages 
of the tower of Babel or Bab-Il were probably com- 
menced by the first king of the Median dynasty, who 
ascended the throne in the implied year of Shem's birth, 
when the mixed race of conquerors and conquered, of 
Japhetites and Hamites, had risen to political import- 
ance. This first king of the first historical monarchy is 
called Zoroaster, by Berosus, the Chaldasan historian, 
after the great Eastern reformer, born in the Aryan 
home. Eeasons can be given for identifying with this 
potentate the Nimrod-Merodach of the Bible and the 
Takmo-Urupis (Urupa) of Iranian tradition, the possessor 
of the same cities which are enumerated in Genesis as 
forming the beginning of Nimrod's empire. These 
seven stages of the Median tower of Babel, with which 
the seven walls may be compared which the Medes 
built for Dejokes, were by the finishers and restorers of 
this tower, if not by Urukh, certainly by Nebukad- 
nezar, dedicated to the seven planets, or rather to sun, 
moon, and fLve planets. Excavations on the Birs- 
Nimrud have shown that the sun was symbolised by 
the middle or highest stage, the moon and the five 
planets by the other stages, which were ranged in 
accordance with the Chaldsean reckonings respecting 
the distances of these bodies from the earth. Exactly 
the same order has been observed in the distribution of 
the seven gates of Thebes ; and also, excepting one trans- 
position, in the symbolical interpretation given by Philo 
and Josephus to the candlestick of Moses. Philo states 
that the central lamp symbolised the sun ; but that ac- 


cording to the deeper knowledge or gnosis it symbolised 
the Word of God, which the Seer at Patmos describes 
in the Apocalypse as the Messiah appearing in the 
midst of the candlesticks, and being the first of seven 
angels. 1 

The link thus established between Eastern and 
Western symbolism is confirmed by a remarkable 
parallel between the seven priests of the Soma-sacrifice 
in the Rig- Veda, and Zechariah's vision of the candle- 
stick. The central priest of the former invoked the 
Deity. This may be compared with Ezechiel's vision of 
the man clothed with linen, as priest, who was sur- 
rounded by six other men, and who performed the 
office of sealing the foreheads of the chosen, a symbolism 
which in the Apocalypse of John is directly connected 
with the Messiah. Already in the Book of Proverbs 
Divine Wisdom is personified and apparently placed 
above the angels. With this Messianic symbolism of an 
Angel-Messiah connected with six other angels we shall 
with ever increasing probability connect the vision of 
the nameless angel, the Angel of the Lord, as one like a 
son of man. This vision is recorded in the Book of 
Daniel, a book certainly not closed till after the founda- 
tion of the Essenic corporation, of which we try to 
prove that its higher members transmitted the doctrine 
of the Angel-Messiah. 

The Messianic conceptions of the East, which were 
connected with the symbolism of the number Seven, and 
referred to an ideal celestial hero and Messiah, sooner 
or later had to make way for the new conception of a 
celestial Messiah in the flesh, of an incarnate Angel- 
Messiah. It cannot be even approximative^ deter- 
mined at what time this change in the Messianic 
conceptions took place in the East, but Gautama- 
Buddha was not the first to whom this Messianic 

1 Ernst von Bunsen, Das Symbol des Kreuzes bei alien Nationen, 92- 
104 ; Die Plejaden, 231-239. 


doctrine was applied. Also the ancient Babylonians 
knew of an Angel-Messiah among men, probably before 
the time of Abraham. The naturalised strangers among 
the Israelites, probably descendants of the Chaldeans 
among whom Abraham lived, and who in the Book 
of Daniel are identified with the Magi, may have trans- 
mitted this Eastern doctrine of the Angel-Messiah. Since 
Daniel was instructed in the science of the Chaldasans or 
Magi, and since the three classes of the Eabbi must be 
associated with the three classes of the Magi, we expect 
to find that in the Hebrew Scriptures composed after 
the deportation to Babylon there will be traces of this 
Eastern doctrine about the Angel-Messiah. 

We must distinguish in the Old Testament the 
earlier prophecies and expectations of an anointed Man 
from the later prophecies and expectations of an 
anointed Angel. 

Already Isaiah the son of Amos had prophesied, 
probably in connection with Nathan's announcement to 
David, that on a Davidic descendant, ' a Branch,' the 
Spirit of the Lord would rest, thus implying that God 
would anoint the son of David with the Holy Ghost. 
This future Anointed or Messiah would confer on Israel 
a Messianic mission. The Babylonian Isaiah, the un- 
known prophet, the so-called evangelist and precursor 
of the Gospel-dispensation, the author of the Second 
Part of the Book of Isaiah, had pointed to the people 
of Israel to whom the Messiah was to be sent, as the 
people to whom the mission of the Servant of God was 
to be confided, as the nation through which the King- 
dom of God was to be set up on earth. A representa- 
tive of this Messianic people, Haggai, had called him- 
self the messenger, as if pointing to a man like Moses, 
chosen from among his brethren, whose coming Israel 
expected, as ' the messenger of the covenant.' This 
divinely inspired human messenger, or ' Maleach,' was 
by Zechariah again called ' the man whose name is the 


Branch.' In another of his visions Zerubbabel and 
Joshua are probably referred to as the two Anointed 
Ones or Messiahs. It is possible that the Prophet 
intended thereby to point to the temporal and to the 
spiritual ruler in Israel as the most enlightened organs 
of Messianic power among the Messianic nation. 

In all these passages the Messiah is described as a 
descendant of David who would be anointed by the 
Spirit of God and become a messenger of God. But 
the word ' maleach ' has the double meaning of messen- 
ger and of angel ; and since the introduction of the 
doctrine of angels into Israel, probably coupled with 
the new definitions for the Deity, Shemeh, or Name, 
and Memra, or Word of God, a passage in Isaiah was 
Messianically interpreted which originally was under- 
stood to refer either to young Hezekiah or to a son 
born to Isaiah by his wife. Although the Hebrew 
word for virgin, ' bethulah,' is not used in this passage, it 
became interpreted as if it were in the text. By such 
means the doctrine of a virgin-born Messiah was intro- 
duced into the Scriptures, which doctrine Clement of 
Alexandria designates as a false doctrine. 1 

A scriptural basis was thus created for the new 
doctrine of the Angel-Messiah, of which there is no trace 
in any of those Scriptures of which it can be asserted 
that they were composed, in the form transmitted to 
us, before the deportation to Babylon. The erroneous 
passage in Isaiah was connected with the passage in 
Genesis about the enmity between the seed of Eve and 
the seed of the Serpent, which enmity should lead to 
the destruction of the latter by the former. This 
passage in Genesis, whether it existed or not in the 

1 Strom, vii. 16 : ' Many even down to our time regard Mary, on account 
of the birth of her child, as having "been in the puerpural state, although she 
was not.' He makes no mention of the account in Matthew, transmitted to 
us, about Mary's virginity ; this he must have done if, in the second cen- 
tury, this passage had already been inserted into the Gospel after Matthew. 


time of Isaiah, contains an unmistakable reference to 
the Eastern symbolism of successive ideal heroes of 
light, who conquer the ideal heroes of darkness, and 
who are all symbolised by the serpent, as the Satan or 
adversary. This symbolism refers, as we showed, to 
the figures on the sphere, where the constellation of 
the Serpent and the adjoining one of the Scorpion are 
placed near the autumn-equinoctial point, whilst the 
heroes of light are connected with the constellations of 
the spring-equinox. The position of the sphere on 
Christmas-day, on the birthday of the sun, shows the 
serpent all but touching and certainly aiming at the 
heel of the woman, that is, the figure of the constel- 
lation Virgo. 1 This pre-Christian symbolism would 
still be historical even if the existence of Gautama' 
could be doubted, whose symbol was the sun, and who 
is reported to have been born on our Christmas-day, 
like Jesus, the Sun of Eighteousness. 

We are thus led to assume, that some time after 
the deportation to Babylon the expectation of an an- 
ointed Man was by some Jews changed into the expec- 
tation of an anointed Angel. Since after the Eeturn 
from Babylon, as we have seen, new definitions of the 
Messiah were introduced into Jewish Scriptures, and 
since at that time the existence of the Essenic corpo- 
ration, a secret society of Jewish dissenters, can be 
proved, by whom some non-Hebrew doctrines and 
customs have been introduced into the Israelitic com- 
munity, the Essenic origin of the new doctrine in 
Israel of an Angel-Messiah becomes probable. We 
shall now try to prove that the Essenes were the first 
historical organs of such an expectation in Israel. 

1 In the text of the Itala and in that of Jerome, the woman, that is the 
Virgin, is said to be the bruiter of the serpent, and this entirely harmonises 
with the position cf the sphere on the "birthday of the virgin-born, which is 
also the birthday of the sun. 


Essenic Expectation of an Angel-Messiah. 

Epiphanius, Bishop of Constantia and Metropolitan 
of Cyprus (a.d. 403) states, 1 that ' the Essenes continue in 
their first position and have not altered at all.' Speak- 
ing of the Ossenes, who were closely connected with the 
former ' sect,' he records the tradition that they had 
originated in the regions of Nabatasa, meaning not Meso- 
potamia, but Arabia-Petrasa ; and among other places 
he mentions the surrounding neighbourhood of the 
Dead Sea, on the Eastern shores of the lake, not on the 
Western, where, according to Pliny, were in his time 
the settlements of the Essenes. ' A certain person 
named Elxai joined them at the time of the Emperor 
Trajan.' The Bishop says, that he was a false prophet, 
and that he wrote ' a so-called prophetical book, which 
he propounded to be according to divine wisdom.' . . . 
' A Jew by birth, and professing the Jewish doctrines, 
he did not Hve according to the Mosaic law, but intro- 
duced quite different things, and misled his own sect 
. . . He joined the sect of the Ossenes, of which some 
remnants are still to be found in the same regions of 
Nabataea and Peraaa towards Moabitis ; and these 
people are now called Simseans,' that is Sampseans, 
after the sun. Epiphanius finally refers to their rejec- 
tion of ' the sacrificial and altar-services as repulsive to 
the Deity,' also to their rejecting 'the eating of animal 
flesh which is common among the Jews,' and finally of 
their rejecting ' the sacrificial altar and the sacrificial 
fire,' though commending ' purifying water.' 

According to other traditions, the same Elxai, 
Elkasai or Elkesai, before he went to Palestine, arose 
in the year 97 a.d. as a religious teacher in the North- 
east of Arabia in the regions of Wasith and Bassrah. 
The Christian-Gnostic sect of the Menda3ans or Man- 

1 Adv. Har. I. x. 28 ; ed. Col. 1682, and Adv. Ossenes, I. xix. 39 ; 
comp. Ginsburg, The Essenes. 


dasans regarded him as its originator. The latest 
investigations have proved, that Elkesai is identical 
with an individual whom the Arabian writer En-Nedim 
calls Scythianus, and whose disciple had been There- 
binthus-Buddha. 1 He seems to have come from that 
part of Scythia to which the independent Parthia 
belonged, since Scythia in the time of the Eoman 
empire bordered in the south on India, as did the 
Parthian kingdom of the Arsakides. According to 
Hippolytus, Elkesai was said to have received the book 
which was called after him 2 from the Parthians in the 
city of Sera, the capital of Serica, according to Ptolemy 
the country in the North-western part of China and the 
adjacent districts of Thibet and Chinese Tartary. Sera 
is supposed to have been Singan on the Hoang-ho, by 
others Peking. Already the Babylonian Isaiah con- 
nected the Chinese with Israel by referring to the 
Sinim, the Persians of the Septuagint, which former 
word the highest authorities connect with Southern 
China, the classical Sinas. The connection of the Book 
of Elkesai with Parthia is very important, as the 
Parthians formed a bridge between the asceticism in 
Mesopotamia and that in India. We may safely con- 
nect Elkesai, the Jew, with the Cassidim or Assidasans 
of Palestine, and thus indirectly with the Median and 
Magian Casdim, the conquerors of Mesopotamia be- 
fore the time of Abraham, with the Chaldaaans, with 
the strangers in Israel. 3 

The ' name ' Elkesai in Hebrew means ' the hidden 
power,' and thus referred to the invisible ' spiritual 
power,' the Maga of the Magi and the Maya of the 
Buddhists. With the name Elkesai may be connected 
the name of the village Al-kush, near Mosul on the 

1 Chwohlson, Die Sabior und der Sabismus. 

3 Refut. ix. 8-12 ; x. 25 ; comp. Eus. H. E., vi. 38 ; Epiph. Hcer. xix. ; 
Theodoret. Hcer. fab. ii. 7. 

3 For the transmitted extracts from the Book of Elkesai, see Appendix to 
Ililgenfeld's Greek Hennas. 


Tigris, to which Nahum the Elkoshite is said by 
modern tradition to have been transported, and where 
Josephus states that Nahum wrote his prophecy about 
the fall of Nineveh. Sargon may have transported 
him in the year 720, and he may well have lived to see 
the fall of Nineveh. Nahum would hardly have been 
called by Hebrews the Elkoshite after the presumable 
place of his captivity where his grave continued to be 
shown to Jewish pilgrims in the middle ages. Unless 
this tradition be regarded as fictitious, invented for 
the convenience of Babylonian Jews, there must 
have been two Elkosh, for a village of that name 
in Galilee was pointed out to Jerome, then in ruins. 
Hitzig has identified this Elkosh with the original name 
of Capernaum, Kaphar-Nahum, or village of Nahum. 
Whether we assume the existence of the two places or 
not, the name of Elkesai, of the Jew who rose as a pro- 
phet in Mesopotamia, and who was also accepted as 
such by the Nazarenes and the Essenes in Palestine, 
may be connected with the name of -the birth-place, if 
not also of the burial-place, of the prophet Nahum. 

Like the secret books of the Essenic Therapeuts, to 
which reference will presently be made, the Book of 
Elkesai was a hidden book, an Apocrypha, which was 
only entrusted to the Initiated and on oath, no doubt 
on the oath of secrecy, like that of the initiated 
Essenes, with whom Epiphanius directly connects him. 
The Mendasans or Christian-Gnostics of Mesopotamia 
derived their name from Manda de hajje, ' the word of 
life.' This is their secret name, whilst they give to 
others Sobba, Saba, Sheba as their name. Their 'great 
book,' Sidra Eabba, is also called Ginsa, ' the treasure.' 
They possess a scripture on John the Baptist, who was 
by Marco Polo found to be highly revered among the 
Sabeans of Central Asia. The Mendseans were also 
called ' disciples of John ; ' and ' the Sabeans of the 
marshes' between the Arabian desert and the lower 


Euphrates and Tigris are, by El-Ulum, the composer of 
the Fihrist, called Mogtasilah, or ' those who wash (bathe) 
themselves.' The principal rite of the Mendseans was 
water-baptism, and the same can be proved to have 
been the case among the Essenes whom Elkesai joined. 
Philo calls them Essai ; and as ' As'chai, from s'cha with 
an aleph prefixed, means in Syriac ' the bathers,' those 
who are immersed or baptised, so John ' the Baptist ' 
may be regarded as a transliteration of John ' the 
Essene.' We then understand why the Essenes or 
disciples of John acknowledged Elkesai as their pro- 
phet, who is said to have been the originator of the 
Mendasans, Sabeans, or disciples of John in Mesopo- 
tamia, whose name Mogtasilah has the same meaning 
as the As'chai of the Essenes. 

Even if it could be proved that any of the Fathers 
ever suspected that Elkesai-Scythianus-Buddha was not 
an historical individual, but that his was a representa- 
tive name, the historical germ of the tradition trans- 
mitted by Hippolytus, Epiphanius, and others, might 
be presumed to have been the following. A Buddhistic 
tradition, contained in a book imported from China, 
was promulgated by him in the first place among the 
initiated Mendaeans of Mesopotamia, who called them- 
selves disciples of John and also Samans or Buddhists, 
and in the second place among the Essenes of Palestine. 
The connection of Elkesai-Buddha's doctrines with the 
East is proved beyond dispute by the recorded fact, 
that the Mendasans, before being received into the 
Christian sect, had solemnly to denounce Zoroaster, 
whose doctrines were by Buddha more generally in- 
troduced into India. The connection of this early 
Christian Gnosticism with the East, and especially with 
Buddhism, is confirmed by what we know of the 
contents of the book called after Elkesai. It was 
imported from China, presumably having been intro- 
duced there by such Buddhists as had been converted 


to this faith through the instrumentality, direct or 
indirect, of some of the 18 Buddhist missionaries, who 
in the year B.C. 250 were sent to China from India by 
Asoka and by the board for foreign missions which he 
established. The Book of Elkesai was said to have 
been revealed by an angel, called ' the Son of God,' 
that is, by the Angel-Messiah, as whose incarnation, we 
may now assume, the Essenes or disciples of John re- 
garded Jesus, at least in the year 100 a.d. 

This Angel-Messiah, proclaimed by Elkesai, was by 
him and by the Mendgeans mysteriously connected with 
a female angel, called ' the Holy Spirit,' or Kucha in the 
language of these Mesopotamian Sabeans, or disciples 
of John. In Hebrew the word Euach, signifying the 
Holy Ghost, is of feminine gender ; and in the Koran, 
that is, in the tradition of the Hanyfs or Sabeans, to 
whom Abraham and Mahomed are said to have be- 
longed, the Holy Ghost is called Euh. The connection 
with the Holy Ghost of Elkesai-Buddha's doctrine about 
the Angel-Messiah, contained in the book which he is 
said to have brought from China to Mesopotamia and 
to Palestine, is all the more remarkable, since the Angel- 
Messiah or Buddha in Chinese-Buddhist writings, trans- 
lated from the Sanscrit about the time of Elkesai, is 
therein recorded to have been incarnated by ' the Holy 
Ghost.' Thus is confirmed the connection of Elkesai's 
book with China, and of his Angel-Messiah with Buddha, 
Since Elkesai was a prophet among the Essenes, these seem 
to have believed in an Angel-Messiah, and this Essenic 
tradition may have been of Chinese-Buddhistic origin. 

The Elkesaitans, like Philo and like the tradition in 
the Pseudo-Clementines, regarded the Angel-Messiah in 
whom they believed, as one of the continuous incar- 
nations of Christ, just as the Buddha of the Buddhists 
formed a link in the chain of incarnations of the 
spiritual power or Maya, which is in angels and men. 
Again, like the Buddhists, they believed the Messiah to 


be born of a virgin, although the Ebionites, who stood 
in some connection with the Elkesaitans, denied this 
doctrine, of which Clement of Alexandria states, as we 
saw, that it was not founded on fact. 

In a probably not correctly transmitted, because 
contradictory passage, Hippolytus states, that according 
to Elkesai's assertion, ' Christ was born a man in the 
same way as common to all (human beings), and that 
(Christ) was not for the first time (on earth when) born 
of a virgin, but that both previously and that fre- 
quently again he had been born and would be born. 
(Christ) would thus appear and exist (among us from 
time to time) undergoing alterations of birth, and 
having his soul transferred from body to body.' In 
another passage Hippolytus writes that the Elkesites 
' acknowledge that the principles of the universe were 
originated by the Deity. They do not, however, confess 
that there is but one Christ, but that there is one that 
is superior (to the rest), and that he is transformed 
into many bodies frequently, and was now in Jesus. 
And, in like manner, that at one time (Christ) was 
begotten of God, and at another time became the 
Spirit, and at another time (was born) of a virgin, and 
at another time not so. And (they affirm) that like- 
wise this Jesus afterwards was continually being trans- 
fused into bodies, and was manifested in many (different 
bodies) at (different) times. And they resort to incan- 
tations and baptisms in their confessions of elements. 
And they occupy themselves with bustling activity in 
regard of astronomical and mathematical science, and 
of the arts of sorcery. But (also) they allege them- 
selves to have powers of prescience.' l 

Like John the Baptist or Essene, Elkesai connected 
forgiveness of sins with a new kind of baptism, evidently 
with the repeated baptisms of the Essenes. These 

1 Translation by Rev. Alex. Roberts, in Antenicene Christian Library, 
vol. vi. p. 389. On Mendseans, see Petermann, Herzog, I.e. 


baptisms seem to have taken place daily, since in 
Eabbinical writings the Essenes or Chassidim forming 
' the holy congregation in Jerusalem ' are called, among 
other names, ' hemerobaptists.' The baptism of the 
Elkesites was solemnised in the Name of the Father and 
of the Son, and under invocation of seven witnesses. 
Similarly to the Essenes, the Elkesites rejected not only 
the sacrifices and the partaking of meat, but also the 
Pauline Epistles. It may be presumed that the latter 
were rejected because of their universality, which prin- 
ciple was upheld by the Essenic Therapeuts in Egypt, 
with whom we shall connect Paul ; but was opposed by 
the separatist Essenes of Palestine, to which Barnabas 
belonged. As the Therapeuts are by Josephus directly 
connected with the Pythagoragans, so Hippolytus states 
that some of the tenets of Elkesai were adopted from 
those of Pythagoras. Finally, as the Essenes are in 
Eabbinical writings identified with the Assidgeans, Chas 
sidim, or the Pious, so Elkesai is by Hippolytus stated 
to have called his disciples the Pious Ones. This bishop 
of Portus, opposite Ostia, near Eome, born soon after 
a.d. 250, testifies to the presence of Elkesaitans in Eome 
in his own days. This is not unimportant, since the 
Christology of the Pseudo-Clementines, published there, 
and parts of which reach back to the first century, 
entirely corresponds with Elkesai's doctrine on the 
continued incarnations of Christ. 

It is not necessary to point out what constituted the 
distinguishing elements of discipline among the ' four 
parties ' of the Essenes mentioned by Hippolytus, and 
which we shall identify with the four classes of Buddhists 
and Essenes, and with the four stages of purity dis- 
tinguished by the Eabbis. 1 Epiphanius states that the 
Essenes continued ' in their first position, and have not 
altered at all.' No mention is made by any writer of 
the Messianic conceptions of the Essenes. As Elkesai 

1 Chagiga, 18 a ; Frankel, I.e. 451. 


became a member of their corporation, and was revered 
by them as a prophet, the Essenes, who never altered 
their creed, may be assumed to have held before Elkesai 
and John the Baptist the Buddhistic doctrine of the 
An ^ el-Messiah. This is indirectly confirmed by the 
silence observed with regard to their Christology ; which 
silence is at once explained, if they believed in an Angel - 
Messiah, for they were by oath bound not to reveal 
anything connected with angels. 

Philo's writings prove, as we have seen, the proba- 
bility, almost rising to certainty, that already in his time 
the Essenes did expect an Angel-Messiah as one of a 
series of Divine incarnations. Within about fifty years 
after Philo's death, Elkesai the Essene provably applied 
this doctrine to Jesus, and it was promulgated in Eome 
about the same time, if not earlier, by the Pseudo- 
Clementines. We need not press the point that Philo 
was, by Clement of Alexandria, called a Pythagorsean, 1 
and that Josephus connects the Pythagoreans with the 
Therapeuts, from which it would follow that Philo was 
an Essenic Therapeut. In harmony with the doctrine 
of Brahmans and Buddhists, and with later Essenic con- 
ceptions of the Elkesaitans, Philo indicates that Moses 
was an organ of the Messianic power or Word of God. 
Moses was neither God nor man, but a supernatural 
being, who had temporarily taken his abode in a mortal 
nature. Philo implies that Moses had the power to 
shake off at will the terrestrial element of his nature, 
with all its exigencies, and that by fastings of forty days 
he prepared himself for Divine revelations, so that he 
was at once priest and prophet. 

According to Philo, Moses was finally an incorporeal 
phantom, similar to Marcion's description of the Messiah. 
Philo states that Moses was raised to the highest of all 
beings, that is, ' to the heavenly man, born after the 
image of God.' This man from heaven had ' no part in 

1 Clem. Alex. Strom., i. 15. 


any transitory or earthlike essence.' Not as man, but 
as spirit, after the death of the body, Moses was per- 
fected. The Word of God, which is in the Angel of 
God according to Exodus, conies to man as ' his angel.' 
This Word of God, or Angel-Messiah, is by Philo also 
called ' the Name ' of God. We have seen that the ex- 
pressions Memra and Adonai were not introduced into 
Hebrew Scriptures before the Captivity or the Eeturn. 
Philo identifies the Angel-Messiah with the Shechina 
above the Cherubim. The Angelic Word is the external 
image of God, the pre-mundane type of mankind. The 
Angel-Messiah is, according to Philo, the companion of 
the human soul, the Divine light shining in the same, 
the bread of heaven, the inseparable link of the universe, 
the Angel of God and God himself, his Firstborn, the 
Mediator between the living and the dead, the Shepherd, 
High Priest, and Advocate, the Paraclete or Comforter. 1 
It becomes probable that the Essenes represented, if 
they did not introduce, among the Jews, that new Mes- 
sianic conception of the Angel-Messiah, of which there 
is no trace in the Old Testament, but which doctrine 
was known to Parsism, and especially to Buddhism. 

Parallel Doctrines and Rites of Essenes, Parsists, 
Buddhists, and Pythagoreans. 

The Essenes form the connecting link between 
Magian, Rabbinical, and Gnostic Judaism on the one 
side, and Parsism and Buddhism on the other. The 
place which can thus be assigned to the Essenes in uni- 
versal history is confirmed by the following points of 
contact between the doctrines and customs of the Essenes 
and those of the Parsists, Buddhists, and Pythagorseans. 

1. The so-called Dualism of the Essenes, their system 

1 Comp. Vita Mos. iii. 2 ; Be Somn. i. 6 ; Be Incor. Man. 1 ; Be Inst. ii. 
8 ; Be Sacrif. 2 ; Be Leg. All eg. i. 12 ; iii. 73 ; Be Profugis ; Be Mund. Opif.', 
Quod a Beo ; Be Plant. Noce : Be Agricid, ; QuisRer. Biv. Hcer. &c. 


of two worlds, the distinction of an immaterial from a 
material world, is directly connected with the most 
ancient astronomical symbolism of the East, with the 
division of the universe into two parts by the ideal line 
connecting the two determining single stars, later con- 
stellations, contemporaneously rising and setting on 
opposite points of the horizon. The Essenic principle 
of separation of body and soul, coupled with the assumed 
antagonism between spirit and flesh, is entirely Bud- 
dhistic, and was more rigidly maintained by the Thera- 
peuts than by the Essenes. 

2. Similar to the four castes of the Indians, of which 
that of the Brahmans was the first, and corresponding 
absolutely with the four grades of Buddhists, the Essenes, 
like the Pharisees, were divided into ' four different 
classes.' Josephus adds, ' the juniors are so much in- 
ferior to the seniors that the latter must wash themselves 
when they happen to touch the former, as if they had 
been defiled by a stranger.' These four orders of the 
Essenes seem to have originated in the three classes of 
the Essenes, that of the candidate, approacher, and the 
associate, which correspond with the three classes of the 
Eabbis, the scholar, master, and perfect master. The 
lowest Essenic class — that of the scholar — was subdi- 
vided into a double noviciate, of one and of two years , 
during which time he was an outsider, and was not 
admitted to the common meals or to any office. This 
connection is confirmed by the parallel between the 
Eabbinical and the Magian three classes, for among the 
Magi there was also a double noviciate. The organisa- 
tion of the Magi forms a fink between the corresponding 
organisations of Essenes and of Buddhists. The four 
classes of Aryas or Eeverends among the Buddhists are 
the following: — (a) The Srolaapanna, or 'he who has 
reached the stream ' which leads to Nirvana ; (b) the 
Sakrida-gamin, or * he who returns once,' who will be 

1 Babyl. Talmud, Tract Chagiga, 18 b. 


born again but once ; (c) the Anagamin, ' he who does 
not return,' but is born again in the heaven of the Gods 
and of Brahma; (d) the perfectly pure and sinless 
Arhat. 1 These four classes are directly connected with 
the cardinal doctrines of Buddhism. 2 They correspond 
with the four classes of the Essenes and the four classes 
of purity among the Pharisees, ' which were so marked, 
that one who lived according to the higher degree of 
purity became impure by touching one who practised a 
lower degree.' 3 

These four classes of Essenes were perhaps subdivided, 
certainly connected with the Essenic eight stages of 
spiritual progress, leading up to the mystic state called 
' Elijahhood,' a name which confirms the view that Elijah 
the ' tishbite ' or stranger belonged, like the Eechabites 
or Essenes, to the naturalised strangers in Israel. The 
Buddhists have the ' eightfold holy path ' (Dhammapada), 
eight spiritual states leading up to Buddhahood. The 
first state of the Essenes resulted from baptism, and it 
seems to correspond with the first Buddhistic state, 
' those who have entered the (mystic) stream.' Patience, 
purity, and the mastery of passion were aimed at by 
both devotees in the other stages. In the last, magical 
powers, healing the sick, casting out evil spirits, etc., 
were supposed to be gained. 4 Buddhists and Essenes 
seem to have doubled up this eightfold path into four, 
for some reason or other. Buddhists and Essenes had 
three orders of ascetics or monks, but this classification 
is distinct from the spiritual classification. 

3. On entering the first stage of the noviciate, the 

1 Koppen, Das Leben Buddhas, i. 398/. 

2 If, according to the monastic system of the Buddhists, a man could 
attain at once the position of the Perfected, even as a layman (Hardy's 
Eastern Monachism, 280/.) this can only have been a comparatively late 
innovation. (Against Lightfoot, Epistles of Paul, Colossians). 

3 Ginsburg, I. c. 21, where the similarity between the doctrines and prac- 
tices of Essenes and Pharisees is pointed out. 

4 Comp. Burnouf, Introduction a Vhistoire du Buddhism? Indian, 290 ; 
with Ginsburg, The Essenes, 13. 


candidate for the Essenian order received an axe, an 
apron, and a white garment. The axe has without 
sufficient reason been identified with the Levitical spade 
mentioned in connection with the camp. But the axe 
could not have been used for the purpose of throwing 
up the soil ; and we know from Pliny, that the axe was 
with the Magi an instrument of magic, that is, that it 
symbolised ideas connected with the supposed super- 
natural world and its spirits, the evil effects of which 
upon man were to be warded off. The apron of the 
Essenes may have corresponded with a similar rite of 
the Magi, for Iranians and Indians had a holy girdle or 
string, which was a symbol of initiation, and probably 
was connected with the star-belt of Mithras. Equally 
probable is the connection between the Essenic ' holy 
garments,' which had to be laid aside before the bath, 
according to Josephus, with the Sadere of the Parsees, 
a short robe of cotton, linen, or silk, which was worn 
under the girdle. It was without sleeves, and Philo 
describes the Essenic ' cheap garments without sleeves.' x 
The Magi and Pythagoreans also wore white robes, at 
least on solemn occasions ; and to the Pharisean candi- 
date was also given a kind of garment, according 
to Talmudian tradition. If the Essene received an 
apron before he was admitted to higher lustrations, it 
is not improbable that the Pharisee of higher orders 
received a white garment for solemn opportunities. 

4. The holy baths of the Essenes, to which the novi- 
ciates of higher grades were admitted, harmonise well 
with the holy water-symbol of the Ormuzd religion, 
especially with the prescribed twenty-nine days of puri- 
fication in the water which was ordered at the Magian 
consecration; and they may be identified with the 

1 Comp. for this and the following : Hilgenfeld, in Zeitschriftfiir wissensch. 
Theologie, 1867, 1871, and his Jiidische Apocalyptic ; Plin. H. N., xxxvi. 
19 (34) ; comp. xxx. 2 (5) ; Philo, Apol. Oss. ii. 633 ; Eus. Frcep. Ev. viii. 
11 ; Spiegel's Avesta i. 8; ii. xxi. 


water-baptism of the Buddhists, who still sprinkle their 
noviciates with water. 1 

5. The solemn oath which, exceptionally, the Essene 
had to take on being admitted a full member of the 
order, gives the same pre-eminence to the duty of 
always speaking the truth, as this was done with the 
Iranians, who, like the Essenes, forbad, at all events 
discouraged, swearing on other occasions. 2 

6. At least since the time of Philo, Pliny, and 
Josephus, the Essenes had separate settlements, and the 
same is reported about the Magi. 3 

7. The Essenes abstained from meat and wine, and 
Eubulos attests the same custom as prevailing among 
the upper classes of the Magi of later times. 4 Bud- 
dhism orders laymen as well as monks, ' Thou shalt not 
kill what has life, . . and not drink fermented liquors.' 5 

8. Again, in harmony with Buddhistic injunction, 
and with the Iranian abhorrence of bloody sacrifices, 
the Essenes abstained from offering the bloody sacrifices 
ordered in the Mosaic books. In a symbolical sense 
they regarded, as did the Pharisees, the table spread 
for their meals, which were accompanied by prayers, 
as their altar. Josephus reports that they offered 
spiritual sacrifices ' in themselves,' and Philo reports, 
that instead of sacrificing any animals, the Essenes 
endeavoured ' to make their minds fit for holy offering.' 
The spiritual offering of self to God by prayer and 
holiness is already enjoined in the Zendavesta or 
interpreted revelation. 6 Thus also the Septuagint, 
almost certainly under Essenic influence, makes David 
say that God ' does ' not desire sacrifice and burnt 
offering. The words ' mine ears hast thou opened ' are 

1 See Chapter II., and Schlagintweit, I. c, 95. 

2 Spiegel, /. c. ii. lv. f. 

3 Ammianus Marcellinus, xxiii. 6. 

4 Plin. H. N., xi. 42 (97) ; coinp. Bernays' Theophrastos on Piety. 

5 Koppen, Das Leben Buddhas, i. 334, 444. 

6 Spiegel, Yaqna, xx. 1 ; xiv. 10. 


left out, no doubt because they might be connected 
with a carnal doctrine of inspiration, according to 
which it was assumed that man can be made to hear 
articulated sounds uttered by invisible beings. The 
spirit of the spiritual and immaterial world could not 
be supposed to produce articulated sounds audible to 
man, according to Essenic principles. Instead of the 
above words of the Psalmist, the text in the Septuagint 
adds, ; a body hast thou prepared me.' These words 
may be connected with the essentially Essenic doctrine 
transmitted by Philo, that the heavenly Messiah takes 
his abode temporarily in mortal nature, and that the 
Word of God comes to man as his angel. 

9. In East and West the chariot of the sun seems 
to have been the symbol of tradition, which latter had 
originated in the East. This may be assumed to have 
been the case with the Buddhists, who divided their 
' Tradition from beyond,' or Wisdom from above, in the 
great and in the small chariot. The word ' tradition,' or 
'merkabah ' of the Rabbis, is a compound of ' rechab ' the 
chariot, and the verbal tradition was divided into two 
classes, the history of creation and that of the chariot. 
Since the sun was the centre of Essenic symbolism, it 
is not improbable that Essenic tradition, which was 
shrouded in mystery, was also symbolised by the solar 
chariot. The Essenic Cassidim, the pious, holy ones, or 
saints, closely resemble the Buddhistic arhats, righteous 
ones or saints, who were to become like the shining 
body of Brahma, to ' enter into the brightness of the 
sun,' the dwelling-place of Abidha the sun-god, that is, 
the Nirvana or destruction of matter, the final resting- 
place of the soul, and centre of supernatural light. 

10. As the Zendavesta recommends watching and 
praying in the night, 1 so the Essenes, according to 
Josephus, never spoke about worldly matters before 
sunrise, but offered up, with their faces towards the 

1 Vendiddd, xviii. 15; iv. 122-126. 


East, as they did also at sunset, ' some of the prayers 
transmitted by their forefathers, as if they supplicated 
it to rise.' It has been pointed out, that the prayer 
here spoken of seems to have been the national Hymn 
of Praise, which still constitutes a part of the daily 
Jewish service. In it the renewal of light is implored 
from God as the Lord of the Universe, the Creator of 
the rays of the sun ; the (seven ?) chiefs of his heavenly 
hosts are holy beings : ' He exalts himself above the 
angels, and beams in glory upon his chariot throne,' 
and the luminaries, ' rejoicing in rising and joyous in 
setting, perform with awe the will of the Creator.' 1 

11. The three times of daily prayer with the Essenes 
corresponded with the three times of daily sun adora- 
tion prescribed in the Zendavesta. 2 The prayer at 
noon, which the Jews seem not to have added to the 
morning and evening prayer till after the Eeturn from 
the Captivity, coincided with the prayer at the Essenic 
meal at noon. In accordance with regulations in the 
Zendavesta, the Essenes bathed before their principal 
meal ; and before as well as after it grace was said by 
the priest. The daily labour of the Essenes ended in 
the morning at the fifth hour, when they assembled, 
girt round with their linen aprons, and had a baptism 
with cold water before they went to the refectory, 
'purified as into a holy temple.' We may therefore 
assert that the prayer before meal took place exactly 
at the sixth hour, or at noon. 

12. In accordance with Brahmanic, 3 and probably 
with Buddhistic custom, certainly with that of the 
Pythagoraaans, the Essenic candidate for initiation bound 
himself by solemn oath not to reveal to such as were 
not members of this corporation the mysteries which 

1 Comp. Ber achat, 9 ; Giusburg, /. c. 69, 70. 

2 Minokh. 357 f. ; Spiegel, I. c. ii. li. 

3 Laws of Menu, viii. 110-113; comp. Selden, Be Jur. Nat. ii. 13; Liv., 
i. 24. 


would be confided to him. But this was only one of 
the many obligations laid upon him. Before he touches 
the common meal, he swears by most awful oaths, first 
to fear God, and next to exercise justice towards all 
men, neither to wrong anyone of his own accord, nor 
by the command of others ; always to detest the wicked 
and side with the righteous ; ever to keep faith invio- 
lable with all men, especially with those in authority, 
for no one comes to office without the will of God ; not 
to be proud of his power, nor to outshine his subor- 
dinates, either in his garments or greater finery, if he 
himself should attain to office ; always to love truth 
and strive to reclaim all liars ; to keep his hands clear 
from stealing and his mind from unholy gain ; not to 
conceal anything from the brotherhood, nor to disclose" 
anything belonging to them to those without, though it 
were at the hazard of his life. He has, moreover, to 
swear not to communicate to anyone their doctrines in 
any other way than he has received them ; to abstain 
from robbing the commonwealth, and equally to pre- 
serve the writings of the society, and the names of the 
angels.' l 

Like the Essenes, the Magi formed a secret society. 
According to Ammianus Marcellinus, 2 the Magi, whom 
Herodotus described as forming a tribe among the 
Medes, transmitted only through their descendants their 
ancestorial tradition, which had been purified by Darius 
Hystaspes, that is, had been more harmonised with the 
religion of the East-Iranians or Zoroastrians. The 
Magi were a religious caste or order, like the Levites 
before the Captivity, after which they ceased to exist as 
a body, probably because the Synagogue— which may 
be regarded as of Iranian origin — was established with- 
out reference to them, and because the Assidasans and 
Essenes formed an order for carrying out purity of 

1 Josephus, De Bell. ii. 8. 

3 Amm. Marc, xxiii. 6; Spiegel's Avesta, ii. vi. 


living, for practising holiness. Into this Essenic order 
many Levites may well have found a place after the 
Eeturn from Babylon, as guardians of tradition and 
representatives of the holiness to which the people of 
Israel was called. On this supposition, it would be 
explained why Josephus states that the uprightness of 
the Essenes is ' not of recent date, but has existed among 
them from times of yore.' Thus alone a meaning can 
be given to the statement of Philo, that the Essenes, 
Jews by birth, were a ' fellowship of disciples ' formed 
by Moses. Again, it is only by connecting the Essenes 
with the Medo-Chaldseans, who lived as ' conquerors ' or 
Casdim in Mesopotamia about 500 years before Abra- 
ham's birth, and by thus connecting the Essenes with 
the naturalised stranger in Israel, that we can under- 
stand how Pliny the Elder (a.d. 23-79) called the 
Essenes a ' hermitical society,' having existed ' thou- 
sands of ages.' We saw that in the time of Nimrod- 
Merodach, probably the first king of the Median dynasty, 
whom Berosus calls Zoroaster, the Medes may have 
had a corporation, if not tribe, of Magi or priests, of 
whom it can be proved that they formed a senate 
under Arsakes and his successors since B.C. 250. Thus 
the ' elders ' of Israel formed the ' senate ' of the people, 
according to the meaning given to the presbyters in 
the Septuagint, in the Books of the Maccabees and of 

13. The Essenic novice of the first stage, which 
lasted twelve months, on entering had to cast all his 
possessions into the common treasury, and this was in 
harmony with the attested custom of the Magi. 1 The 
Essenic and Magian and also Buddhistic principle of 
community of goods, the renouncing even of all per- 
sonal property by the Therapeuts, is entirely foreign to 
the Mosaic law and to the cardinal preculiarities of 
Hebrew character. Yet the ascetic life with which it 

1 Diog. Laert. Procem. 6 (7). 


is connected is even more ancient than Moses, inas- 
much as the Books bearing his name contain regula- 
tions for the vow of the Nazarite or Nazirite of days, 
whilst the institution of Nazarites for life was probably 
of at least equal antiquity. The great similarity be- 
tween the Jewish Nazarite and the Indian hermit con- 
firms the foreign origin of this institution among the 
Jews. It is regarded by Cyril of Alexandria (a.d. 412- 
444) as introduced from without, and this view is very 
generally accepted. Although the bishop must have 
had some reason for connecting the long hair of the 
Nazarites with an Egyptian custom, yet neither among 
the Egyptian priests nor generally among male Egyp- 
tians such a custom prevailed in the time of Herodotus. 
The father of history states, that the Egyptians ' from 
early childhood have the head shaved,' and that the 
Egyptian priests shave the head. This, as well as the 
shaving of the beard, was a general custom among the 
male population. It has been shown, however, that 
the ancient customs among the Egyptians to anoint the 
guest's artificial hair with oil, and the priest's touching 
the king with his finger as a symbol of his having been 
anointed, point to rites imported from a foreign country. 
They especially point to India, from whence the original 
Egyptians seem to have come, and where the rite of 
cutting off the hair from the entire body never existed. 1 
The Brahmanic priest, although wearing the tonsure, 
was ordered to let his hair grow long on his head, 
beard, and body, and he was anointed by the holy oil. 
Contrary to this Brahmanic rite, the Buddhist novice 
was enjoined 'not to ornament himself with flowers and 
ribbands, nor to use scents, nor to anoint himself.' 
Again, the Buddhist Sramana or tamer of the senses, 
therefore, even the Buddhist of lowest order, was not 
allowed to possess anything. 2 

1 Wilkinson, Ancient Egyptians, ii. 327 f. 
3 JLoppen, /. c. i. 3S4, 366. 


The Essenic rule which enjoined community of 
goods and forbad the use of the anointing oil can only 
be connected with the corresponding rules amono- 
Buddhists and among the Magi. Even the more an- 
cient East-Iranian tradition in the Zendavesta, where 
the Magi are not mentioned, contains regulations about 
the cutting of the hair and nails, and removing them 
from ' the pure men,' which exclude the hairs of the 
East-Iranians ever having been anointed with oil. Of such 
practice there is no trace in the Zendavesta. According 
to Herodotus, and probably according to the monuments, 
the Assyrians always wore the hair long ; and though 
nothing is said about their ends being cut, it may be 
assumed that the Zoroastrian order continued to be 
respected by them. The servants of Ormuzd, and so 
also the Hebrew priests, were to cut off the ends of 
their hairs, to poll them. But Xenophon states, that 
the Medes of the upper classes, and therefore also the 
Magi, wore wigs. 1 We may therefore assert, that the 
Magi never anointed themselves, which the Buddhists 
were forbidden to do. Contrary to the Hebrew prac- 
tice and order, the Essenes abstained from the use of 
the anointing oil, which the Jews generally did only as 
a sign of mourning. This Essenic regulation, like that 
referring to the anti-Jewish principle of community of 
goods, cannot possibly be separated from, and must be 
connected with, the parallel Magian and Buddhistic 
customs. The Pythagorasan use of ointment may be 
connected with the Brahmanic rite. 

14. Love of truth was inculcated by Essaism, as by 
Parsism and Buddhism, and was promised by an oath. 2 
Josephus states of the Essenes, that 'every word witli 
them is of more force than an oath.' He adds: 'They 

1 Vendidad, xvii. 10 f. ; Herod. i. 195: Lev. xxi.6; Ez. xliv 20; Xeu 
Cyrop., i. :>,, 2. 

2 Spiegel, l.r., ii. lv. Every member of the royal Kshatriya line had tp 
take an oath he would 'scorn the lie.' (Beal, Romantic History of 
Buddha, 222. 1 ' ' 


avoid taking an oath, and regard it as worse than per- 
jury ; for they say, that he who is not believed without 
calling on God to witness, is already condemned of 
falsehood.' 1 

15. Prediction of future events was practised by the 
Magi, Essenes, and Pythagoreans. 

16. Some of the Essenes and all Therapeuts ab- 
stained by their own free will from marriage, which 
Buddhism forbad for monks only, 2 whilst to all Parsists 
celibacy was an abomination. The Pythagoreans must 
have allowed matrimony, as Pythagoras was married. 

17. The equality of all men was a fundamental 
Essenic and Buddhistic principle, which excluded 
slavery and made * all free and mutually serving each 
other,' as Philo states about the Essenes. The Bud- 
dhistic principle of universality, and of regard for the 
religions of others, does not seem to have been implicitly 
followed by the Essenes during the rising of the 
Maccabees, if we identify the allies of the latter, the 
Assideans, with the Essenes. But they could not in 
such trying times have kept their promise to 'detest 
the wicked and side with the righteous,' without risking 
their lives in the defence of what they regarded as 
most holy, the Mosaic law as interpreted by their order. 
Yet Philo could attest, that the Essenic body was a 
peace society, which discouraged war as much as 
possible, and anything which might lead to it. 

18. Although the Essenes, according to Josephus, 
' did nothing without the injunctions of their overseers,' 
and had all things in common, yet they were at liberty 
to help the needy, to show mercy, help the deserving 
when in want, and to give food to the hungry. With 
the Buddhists the first of their six cardinal virtues is to 
have compassion. 3 

1 Clement of Alexandria says the same about the true Gnostic. Strom . 
vii. 8. 

2 Koppen, /. c. i. 352. 3 Kbppen, I. c. i. 373. 


19. The figurative or allegorical interpretation of 
symbols is by Philo spoken of as practised by the 
Essenes, who ' philosophised on most things in symbols, 
according to the ancient zeal.' They worked out them- 
selves ' the ethical part ' of their Scriptures, ' using as 
their guides the laws which their fathers inherited, and 
which it would have been impossible for the human 
mind to devise without Divine inspiration ; herein they 
instruct themselves at all times, but more especially on 
the seventh day.' As old and young then assembled in 
the synagogues, the interpreter or Targumist, ' one of 
those who have most experience,' expounded what the 
reader had read, and in so doing passed over ' that 
which is riot generally known,' that is, the secret tra- 
dition with which the elder members of the society 
were alone acquainted. From this it follows, that the 
deeper sense or gnosis, the allegorical meaning of the 
Scriptures, was entrusted only to the Initiated, that is, 
to the full members. Writing about the Therapeuts, 
Philo states, as reported by Eusebius, that ' as they are 
engaged with the sacred Scriptures, they reason and 
comment upon them, explaining the philosophy of their 
country in an allegorical manner ; for they consider the 
verbal interpretation as signs indicative of a secret 
sense communicated in obscure intimations. They have 
also commentaries of ancient men, who as the founders 
of the sect, have left many monuments of their doctrine 
in allegorical representations, which they use as certain 
models, imitating the manner of the original institution.' 

A similar practice seems to have prevailed among 
the Magi, inasmuch as, according to Ammianus Mar- 
cellinus, they transmitted their ancestorial tradition 
exclusively through the members of their society, a 
privilege to which it may safely be assumed the novi- 
ciates of both stages were not entitled. Since marriage 
as a rule was discarded by the Essenes, they could not 
found their order upon natural descent; and the lattei 

K 2 


thus differed from the Magian institution. Also the 
Buddhistic division of their tradition into a great and 
small conveyance, like the division of the Eabbinical 
tradition, seems to point to a gradual initiation in the 
mysteries of transmitted lore. 

20. Like the Magi, some of the Essenes were physi- 
cians ; and the Essenes in Egypt called themselves 
Therapeutse, probably not only as healers of the body, 
but also of the mind and the soul. The Essenes ' in- 
vestigated medical roots and the property of minerals 
for the cure of distempers.' According to the Talmud, 
as well as to Byzantine and Arabian writers, already 
Solomon was held to have written works on miraculous 
cures and driving out evil spirits. The physicians 
amono- the Essenes may have formed a special class ; 
and, as there were Theosophists among them, these 
may have formed a class also ; and a third class may 
have been formed by exorcists, or those who drove out 
evil spirits. Certain it is, that the Magi in the time 
of Daniel were divided in these three classes, as was 
also the very ancient Chaldsean book on Magic. 

21. From the East, whether through the Magi, or 
Buddhists, or Pythagoraeans, or Egyptians, the Essenes 
must have derived their doctrine about the immortality 
of the souls. The Essenes held, that the souls ' come 
out of the most subtle ether,' that is, from the supposed 
immaterial world, and that they are enveloped by their 
bodies as in a prison-house, till, released from servitude, 
they ' rejoice and mount upwards.' Thus it is implied, 
that they return to the immaterial world of spirits, 
where matter is annihilated, that is, to the sun, as to 
the Nirvana of Buddhists. 

22. The presumable Essenic expectation of an Angel- 
Messiah is that of the Iranians and Buddhists, and it was 
kept secret, as were many important Essenic doctrines, 
especially those connected with angels. Like the Buddhists 
and Hindus, the Essenes must have believed and taught 


their Initiated that salvation is by faith, and that faith 
comes by the Maya or Brahm, the Spirit or Word of 
God, of which the Angel-Messiah is the divinely ap- 
pointed incarnate messenger. 

23. As a necessary consequence of the Eastern tradi- 
tion about the two antagonistic worlds of spirit and 
matter, the Essenes introduced into Judaism the doctrine 
of ' everlasting punishment ' for the wicked after death. 
As Buddhists taught that no reasonable being denied by 
matter, which is the cause of sin, can enter Nirvana, 
that is, as we have suggested, the sun, where matter is 
annihilated, so the Essenes taught, according to Josephus, 
the doctrine of rewards for the good, and 'never-ceasing 
punishments ' for the wicked, souls. 

24. The Essenic Therapeuts of Egypt, who have been 
more influenced directly or indirectly by Buddhism than 
the Essenes of Palestine, had, in common with the latter, 
the following doctrines and customs : — The distinction 
of a spiritual and immaterial world from a material 
world, or the dualism of the East, connected with ever- 
lasting rewards and eternal punishments ; the corporative 
system ; a high regard for the transmitted writings of 
their order, by the side of Mosaic writings ; the highest 
reverence for Moses, the real and deeper but hidden 
meaning of whose doctrines they brought to light by a 
figurative interpretation of the words, ' by mystic ex- 
pressions in allegories.' Both communities maintained 
the Jewish-Essenic doctrine of inspiration as regards the 
Mosaic Scriptures, if not the Prophets ; but they recog- 
nised a relatively higher stage of revelation or gnosis, 
of which the books of their own order were the recog- 
nised exponents : this Divine revelation they regarded 
as continuous in mankind, so that their collection of 
Scriptures was never acknowledged as closed ; * Essenes 

1 'The mysteries which were hid till the time of the Apostles, and were 
delivered by them as they received from the Lord, and, concealed in the 
Old Testament, were manifested to the Saints, (to the Pious, Saints, or 


and Therapeuts had in common the anti-hierarchical 
character of their organisation ; abstention from meat 
and wine, probably also of animal sacrifices in the 
Temple, for which reason they were excluded from the 
Temple-service ; their dress ; the abolition of slavery ; 
the adoration of the Deity through the symbol of the 
sun ; the strict keeping of the Sabbath, when only the 
Therapeuts exceptionally anointed their bodies. 

The Essenic principle of community of goods is by 
the Therapeuts heightened to entire absence of pro- 
perty ; thus also the self-chosen occasional avoidance of 
marriage by Essenes is with the Therapeuts a rigidly 
enforced rule, in harmony with the Buddhistic prohibi- 
tion of marriage among the priests. The Therapeuts 
maintained more rigidly than the Essenes the principle 
of enmity between the spirit and the flesh. Also, they 
were more severe in their separation than the Essenes, 
for they lived in huts, like hermits, and thus laid the 
foundation to the convent-life in the West, which the 
Buddhists had established in the East. The asceticism 
of the Therapeuts was extended over the entire day, so 
that they did not meet for a common meal, which they 
solemnised with increased solemnity in the night, and 
which resembled in various points the meal of the Essenes 
at noon. Every kind of manual labour was abolished 
by the increased asceticism of the Therapeuts, who led 
a life of contemplation and prayer without work, closely 
resembling the hermits among the Brahmans and Bud- 
dhists. More rigidly than with the Essenes, it was the 
aim of the Therapeuts, by the greatest possible separa- 
tion from what is sensual, to come in contact with the 
influences of the unseen, spiritual, and immaterial world, 
above all with the Angel-Messiah, and thus to be pre- 

Chassidim, the Essenes).' Cleui. Alex. Strom, v. 10. He describes the Gnosis 
as ' the apprehension of things present, future, and past.' Strom, vi. 7. The 
Gnostic receives 'a sort of quality akin to the Lord himself, in order to 
assimilation to God.' Strom, vi. 17. 


pared for the setting up of a spiritual kingdom of heaven 
on earth. The Therapeuts wished, as Philo states, to 
be ' citizens of heaven and of the world,' to live ' in the 
soul alone ' whilst living in the flesh. 

25. The fundamental principle of Essenes and Thera- 
peuts, to strive after purity in thought, word, and deed, 
though it may be regarded as a development of the 
Mosaic law, was taught by Zoroaster and acknowledged 
by the Magi. Like the distinction of a spiritual from a 
material world, with which the doctrines of angels and 
spirits, and thus of the Angel-Messiah, were directly 
connected, the principles of a higher morality as prac- 
tised by the Essenes, and their submission to an all- 
governing and predestinating Supreme Will, must be 
connected with those Iranian and Buddhistic concep- 
tions with which the Israelites during the Captivity had 
come into contact. Only by the introduction of this 
foreign or non-Hebrew element, traceable to the Essenes, 
it is possible to explain the non-Mosaic and anti- 
Hebraistic community of goods, the abolition of slavery, 
the prohibition of oaths except the oath of initiation, 
their all but general preference for the unmarried state, 
the abstention from meat and wine and from the 
anointing oil, excepting the Sabbathical rite of the 
Therapeuts, their abhorrence of bloody sacrifices, and, 
finally, the doctrine of the Angel-Messiah. 


The conscious incorporation of new or of newly 
promulgated doctrines, and of new rites, into Judaism 
by the Essenes can no longer be denied. 1 During cen- 
turies before and after the existence of the Essenic 
order the land of the Medo-Chaldaeans or Magi, to whom 

1 Canon and Professor Lightfoot admits the introduction of Persian, but 
not of Buddhistic rites by the Essenes, and denies the conscious incorpora- 
tion of this foreign element into Judaism. 


the Essenes stood in close relationship, was directly 
connected with India by the independent Parthian 
kingdom, and nearly five centuries before Abraham 
these Medo-Clialdaeans commenced their rule over Meso- 
potamia. The similarity between the asceticism on the 
Euphrates and that on the Ganges confirms the early 
connection of these countries. The asceticism of- the 
Magi and Essenes is unknown to the Zendavesta and to 
the Veda, although in the former a material from an 
immaterial or purely spiritual world is distinguished. 
The mixed Iranian and non-Iranian character of the 
Median race explains the strange mixture of Iranian 
and Indian doctrines among the Medo-Chaldaeans with 
their Magi, and among the Essenes, whom we may 
ethnically connect with the former. 

The connection between Buddhistic and Essenic doc- 
trines and customs is proved, and to the former belonged 
the doctrine of the Angel-Messiah, of which there is no 
trace in Hebrew Scriptures which can be asserted to have 
been written before the deportation to Babylon, nor in 
the first three Gospels. With the uninterrupted chain of 
Buddhistic writings in China, translated from the Sanscrit, 
and dating ' from at least B.C. 100 to a.d. 600,' coupled 
with the probably pre-Christian representations of sub- 
jects treated by Buddhistic legends, we may connect what 
Buddhistic legends in pre-Christian times taught at least 
about the birth of the Angel-Messiah. Some of the other 
recorded traits of the life of Gautama-Buddha as the 
incarnate Angel-Messiah cannot at present be proved 
to date from the pre-Christian period. 

It is absolutely certain that there is no reliable trace 
of the doctrine of an Angel-Messiah in Jewish Scriptures 
till after the deportation to Babylon; that the Essenic 
order, preceded by the Assidasans and Rechabites or 

1 Exort. 6; Strom, i. L3, 15, 21, 25, 26; ii. 5, 18; v. 5, 10, 11, U; 
vii. 2-3. 

8 Beai, Dhammapada, Intr, 11. 


Kenites, was established not later than B.C. 143 ; that 
before this time Buddhistic records about the birth 
of the Angel-Messiah existed in the East, and that 
Essenic tradition must be connected with the East. The 
probability thus shown, that the Essenes believed in and 
expected an Angel-Messiah, though they were bound 
not to divulge anything connected with Angels, can be 
almost raised to the dignity of a fact by what has been 
transmitted to us about John the Baptist. 

The question arises : At what time and under what 
circumstances was the Eastern and Essenic doctrine of 
the Angel-Messiah applied to Jesus Christ as it had 
been applied about 500 years earlier to Gautama- 
Buddha, who, like Jesus Christ, was said to have been 
born on Christmas-day? Did John the Baptist, the 
' bather ' or Ashai, belong to the Assidaeans, Essai, or 
Essenes ; and what were the relations between the 
doctrines of John and those of Jesus ? 




The stranger in Israel — Jesus and the Essenes — Jesus and the hidden wis- 
dom — Jesus and the sacrifice — Jesus the Messiah — Conclusion. 

The Stranger in Israel. 

Jesus is shown by Biblical records to have been a descen- 
dant of David, whose ancestor was Caleb the Kenezite 
or non-Hebrew. Who was the stranger in Israel ? 

The first inhabitants of the West seem to have come 
from the East on two main roads. The earliest historical 
stream of Orientalists consisted of black or Hamitic 
tribes, who wandered from the land watered by the Gihon- 
Oxns, from the land of Ciish, the later Turan, to India, 
and thence, in course of time, by Arabia, Egypt, Libya, 
and Canaan, to Mesopotamia, where they built Babylon. 
After a long and indefinite time the black inhabitants 
of Mesopotamia and adjoining countries were subju- 
gated by a once unmixed white race of Japhetites, by 
the Medes of Berosus, whose conquest took place 
B.C. 2458, and who had journeyed from the East, origi- 
nally from the Aryan home, the Eden of Genesis, and 
had come across Central Asia by the high table-land of 
Iran. These conquerors called themselves in their own 
language Casdim, later Kaldi or Chaldeans, and they 
gave to the conquered plain between the two rivers the 
name of Shinar. This Medo-Chaldaean dynasty in Baby- 
lon ruled there from B.C. 2458-2234, and its first king 
was called Zoroaster, after the great reformer of the 
East-Iranians, but he also received the title Nimrod, 


formed after the Iranian deity Merodach. The priests 
of these Medo-Chaldaeans were sooner or later called 
Magi, and thus is explained the identification of Magi 
and of Chaldaeans in the Book of Daniel. 

The subjugation of Hamites by Japhetites in the 
lowland of the Euphrates and Tigris brought about that 
ethnic combination with which in Genesis the name of 
Shem has been connected. Two years after the Flood 
he was a hundred years old, he was born ninety-eight 
years before the Flood. For this event Hebrew tradition, 
according to Censorinus and Varro, designated the year 
B.C. 2360, so that Shem's birth took place in B.C. 2458, 
in the year of the Medo-Chaldaean conquest of the 
country in which the first Semitic settlements were 
situated, beginning with Elam on the Persian Gulf. It 
is thus implied, that the birth of Shem must be ethni- 
cally explained by the combination of Japhetites and 
Hamites, who had come from the East and had amalga- 
mated in the land of the so-called settlements of Shem's 
descendants. Since the conquest of Mesopotamia or 
the birth of Shem, Japliet did dwell in the tents of Shem, 
and Canaan, the Hamite, was his servant. From the 
commencement of this so-called Semitic period, and 
during all phases of Israel's history, Hebrews lived 
together with non-Hebrews, principally Chaldeans. The 
non-Hebrew was ' the stranger ' in Israel, the naturalised 
foreigner within the gate, who seems to have obtained 
full rites of citizenship, as is shown by the narratives 
of Doeg the Edomite, Uriah the Hittite, Araunah the 
Jebusite, Zelek the Ammonite, and Itmah the Moabite, 
though the Ammonites and Moabites are in Deuteronomy 
forbidden to enter the congregation of the Lord. 

Abraham bowed before Melchizedec,the non-Hebrew, 
and Moses did all what Jethro the Kenite, the priest of 
Jehovah, told him. The sons of Jethro, the Kenites of 
Midian, were invited by Moses to join, and did join 
under Ilobab, the Hebrews, who left Egypt as a ' mixed 


multitude.' They settled with Judah in Arad, and they 
were certainly connected with, if not the ancestors of, 
the Eechabites, who could say in the time of Jeremiah, 
that they had always been strangers in Israel, and whom 
the Prophet designated as patterns of obedience. Ac- 
cording to the ethnic scheme here followed, the Hebrew 
belonged to the Hamitic or Indian stream, he was a 
descendant of the builders of Babylon, as was Abraham, 
whose fathers had lived, more than 450 years before his 
birth, in subjection to the conquerors or Chaldaeans, 
after whom his native city was called Ur of the Casdim 
or Chaldees. The stranger in Israel was accordingly 
the Medo-Chaldasan or Iranian, related to the Magi, with 
whom Daniel was connected, and whose overseer he 

The Israelites of both races recognised the Mosaic 
law, the provisions of which for the stranger, later 
called proselyte or convert, were certainly either in 
part added later or not carried out. This was the case, 
as observed, with regard to his not being allowed to 
hold land. Signs are not wanting which seem to imply, 
that with the dualism of race in Israel was connected 
a dualism of ecclesiastical and of political institutions, 
that the two lines of Aaronites and the political parties 
of Sadducees and Pharisees originated in the compound 
race of Indian Hamites and Iranian Japhetites in Israel. 
After the Eeturn from Babylon, the non-Hebrew element 
seems for a time to have formed the majority in Israel, 
inasmuch as the men of Judah may be assumed to have 
been partly descendants of those Kenites who settled with 
that tribe in the time of Joshua, and who were also ex- 
ported to Babylon according to the superscription of the 
71st Psalm, as transmitted by the Septuagint. Again, 
Zerubbabel was a descendant of David, who was a direct 
descendant of Caleb the Kenezite. It certainly was not 
till after the Eeturn that the synagogues were gene- 
rally introduced, the Iranian origin of which is made 


highly probable by the parallel between the three 
classes of Eabbis and those of the Magi or Chaldeans, 
and by the absence of the Sadducees from the synagogue, 
which the strangers visited. At the commencement of 
the Christian era, and probably ever since the time of 
Ezra and of the Maccabees, a spirit of rigid exclusive- 
ness was established, which would go some way to 
explain, even if taken by itself, the Sadducean persecu- 
tion of a teacher in the synagogue, of a stranger in 
Israel, who was a descendant from David. 

The descent of David from Caleb the Kenezite, and 
thus from non-Hebrews, points to a connection of Jesus 
with the strangers in Israel. This is confirmed by the 
significative fact, that the four female ancestors of Jesus 
who are mentioned in the genealogies of Matthew are 
all non-Hebrews. Although the descent of Thamar is 
not specified in the Bible, Philo calls her ' a stranger,' x 
and with this statement the Biblical narrative can be 
easily harmonised by enlarging the literal sense of it to 
a figurative one. To do this we have also another 
reason, inasmuch as the credibility of the account 
rendered about Thamar mil be enhanced by the alle- 
gorical interpretation of the text. Already in the 
history of Abraham, as recorded in Genesis, we find 
traits which lead us to assume that international rela- 
tions are sometimes described as family connections. 
It is probable that Abraham's concubines represented 
non-Hebrew nationalities, and that the narratives in 
question refer not to marriages between two indivi- 
duals, but to relations between the Hebrew and some 
non-Hebrew nations. 

Were we to interpret the story of Thamar and 
Judah literally, the only possible argument would be, 
that the most unparalleled immorality was necessary to 
ensure the descent of Messiah's ancestor from Judah. 
Of him Jacob is recorded to have prophesied that lie 

1 De NobU. r>. 


would be praised by his brethren, that these should 
bow before him, that the sceptre should not depart 
from Judah, and that unto him should be the gather- 
ing, or rather the obedience, of the people. This state 
of things is to endure either until he (his tribe) come 
to Shiloh, or until Shiloh comes, that is, ' rest.' In 
order to interpret this passage Messianically, we must 
accept the latter possible reading, and assume Shiloh 
to mean, not a locality, but a person, the man of peace 
or rest. On this supposition the prophecy might be 
regarded as fulfilled by Solomon, a descendant of 
Judah, whose name signifies 'rest' or 'peace.' But in 
order to make this passage refer to a future son of 
David and Son of God, to the Prince of Peace, to whom 
the passage in Isaiah was assumed to point, the Shiloh- 
Messiah must be identified with a man anointed by the 
Holy Ghost, not with an incarnate angel, of which con- 
ception there is no trace in the Old Testament. Taken 
in its literal sense and Messianically interpreted, the 
narrative about Judah and Thamar would lead to the 
revolting conclusion that Pharez, the offspring of that 
illicit intercourse, was the only link between a Divine 
promise and its fulfilment. 1 

The only escape from this dilemma is offered by the 
assumption that, in this passage, as certainly in others, 2 
the matrimonial metaphor is used, that the recorded 
intercourse between Judah and Thamar the stranger, 
was by the Initiated in the mysteries of Scripture known 
to refer to the recorded cohabitation of the tribe Judah 
and of the non-Hebrew Kenites, who settled with them 
in the wilderness of Arad, and formed an inseparable 
tie with Judah. These Kenites had previously dwelt 
in the City of Palms, in Thamar, later called Engedi, 

T It is remarkable that Caleb, descendant of Phares, is excluded from 
i the whoredom,' or falling away of the Israelites in the Desert. (Num. 
xiv. 33.) 

** Judges ii. 17 ; Ps. cvi. 39. 


and before they accompanied Judah to Arad, the king 
of Arad ' the Kenite ' ruled there. The Kenites, like 
the Eechabites, the strangers, were descendants of 
Hemath or Hamath ; and of the Eechabites, it is prov- 
able that they went with the Hebrews to Babylon, 
whilst after the Eeturn they, like many Levites, seem to 
have merged into the order of Assidasans and Essenes. 
Even if we literally interpret the transmitted connection 
of Judah and Thamar, the name Er or Ger, that is, 
6 stranger,' given to the first-born of Judah and of the 
Canaanite Bath-Shuah, indirectly confirms the foreign 
descent of Thamar, and renders more probable the 
ethnic interpretation of her so-called marriage with 
Judah. The same foreign element may be assumed in 
the compound names of Ger, such as Gershon, Ger- 
gasites or Girgashites, and Gerizim. 

The second female ancestor of Jesus is Eahab or 
Eachab, that is, Eechab, and thus refers to the Kenites. 
Eahab of Jericho, whom Josephus describes only as an 
innkeeper, was probably connected with the Kenites in 
Israel before she became the wife of Salmon or Salma, 
the father of Bethlehem, and Boaz, the husband of 
Ruth. The Targum of Jerusalem calls the strangers in 
Israel the Salmaites ; and in the Books of Ezra and 
Nehemiah ' the children of Jericho ' and ' the men of 
Jericho ' are mentioned separately, as if representing a 
non-Hebrew element. Eahab seems to have been called 
a harlot, because in the time of Ezra, when our Hebrew 
text was revised and partly re-written, to marry a non- 
Hebrew woman was regarded as equally abominable 
as to marry a harlot. It is probable, at least pos- 
sible, that the matrimonial metaphor was not before 
this time introduced into such narratives as those of 
Judah and Thamar, and of Eahab. 

The third female ancestor of Jesus, Euth the 
Moabite, was a descendant of Caleb the Kenezite, and 
connected with Eahab the Eechabite or Kenite. 


The fourth woman who is mentioned in the genea- 
logies as an ancestor of Jesus was ' the wife of Uriah ' 
the Hittite, that is, Bathsheba, which name in a modi- 
fied form is Bathshua. She was granddaughter of 
Ahitophel, who was born in the hill-country of Judah, 
where the Kenites dwelt, and daughter of Eliam or 
Ammiel, which was the name of four non-Hebrews. 
The name Bathshua, or daughter of Shua, connects the 
wife of the Hittite with the Canaanite or Kenite name 
Shua, the wife of Judah, whose son was called Er or 
Ger, the stranger. Also one of the sons of Abraham 
and of his concubine Keturah (Ket, Cheta, or Hittite of 
Ur ?) was called Shua, which name, with the divine 
prefix, formed Jeho-Shua, Joshua, or Jesus. 

It is absolutely certain that all four female ances- 
tors of Jesus were non-Hebrews, and that, if we inter- 
pret their narratives literally, every one of them had 
become separated from her first love, for one reason or 
other. Whether these narratives be regarded as not 
literally true, but as dictated by the Hebrew spirit of 
exclusiveness which ruled in the time of Ezra and at 
the time to which the genealogies of the New Testament 
refer, or whether they be accepted as strictly historical, 
the non-Hebrew element among the direct ancestors of 
Jesus is proved. This non-Hebrew element in Israel 
can be connected principally with the Medo-Chalda3ans, 
with the nation which ruled in Mesopotamia before 
Abraham was born, and which transmitted that Chal- 
damn or Magian wisdom in which Daniel was instructed. 
Speaking broadly, we may say that this was the tra- 
dition of the Zenda vesta. The connection of Jesus 
with the Synagogue, and of the latter with Magian 
tradition, confirms the non-Hebrew descent of Jesus. 

Jesus and the Essenes. 
It has been rendered highly probable, if not certain, 
that John the Ashai, the bather or Baptist, has the 


same meaning as John the Essai, as Philo calls the 
Essene. If the disciples of John were Essenes, the re- 
markable fact is explained, that the Essenes, forming 
the third party in Israel, are never mentioned by that 
name in the New Testament. On this supposition, we 
may also explain the still more astounding, though 
only implied, identification of Essenes and Christians 
by Josephus, who was for a time himself an Essene if 
Banus was one. John resembled the Essenes by his 
life in secluded places — we never hear of him in cities, 
not even in Jerusalem during the feasts — by his mode 
of living and his dress, and by his water-baptism. We 
may assume, that John, in accordance with the recorded 
announcement of his birth, was a Nazarite for life, 
which all Essenes were, and that, like these, he never 
visited the Temple, nor offered bloody sacrifices. In 
harmony with all we know about the Essenes, John 
never referred to the Holy Ghost, but pointed to One 
who should come after him, and who would baptize 
' with the Holy Ghost and with fire,' that is, with fire as 
the symbol of the Holy Ghost. Contrary to the teach- 
ing of Jesus, but in harmony with Essenic practice, John 
made the change of mind dependent on outward acts, 
on ceremonies ; he was a mystic ritualist, as all Essenes 
were. In the Acts we are told that Paul met disciples 
of John who had not even heard that there is a 
Holy Ghost. Also Apollos of Alexandria, a disciple 
of John, though zealously preaching about Jesus, did 
not proclaim him as the Christ, as Him whom God 
had anointed ' with the Holy Ghost and with power,' 
until Aquila and his wife had instructed the Alexan- 
drian, and possibly the Therapeutic novice, in the 
more perfect, in the deeper knowledge or gnosis, 
known only to the initiated Therapeuts near Alexandria 
and elsewhere. 

The doctrine of the Holy Ghost, which John and his 
disciples connected with the Angel-Messiah whom they 



expected, must have been unknown to the uninitiated 
members of the Essenic corporation, as it was unknown 
to disciples of John the Baptist or the Essene, and it must 
have formed part of the secret tradition of the Essenes. 
For in the Mishna there is a passage which can only be 
referred to the Essenes, and where the gift of the Holy 
Ghost is connected with the grades of initiation, and 
with the future Elias, the forerunner of the Messiah. 
6 The zeal for the law and the Pharisaic purity lead 
from grade to grade to the Hassi-douth (piety), whence 
one is led to the gift of the Holy Ghost, who will finally 
bring the resurrection of the dead through Elias, the 
forerunner of the Messiah.' 1 With this Essenic expec- 
tation of Elias as organ of the Holy Ghost and as fore- 
runner of the Messiah must be connected the fact, that 
John the Baptist dressed like Elijah and lived in the 
region of his chief activity. John is in the Gospel 
after Luke designated, on the authority of the angel 
announcing his birth, as filled with the Holy Ghost, 
and as going before the Lord ' in the spirit and power 
of Elias,' whilst he himself pointed to the future Mes- 
sianic baptism with the Holy Ghost. This power of 
God was to be brought from heaven by the Messiah, 
whom therefore John must have regarded as an incar- 
nate Angel. 

John regarded the coming of the Spirit of God to 
mankind, that is, the kingdom of heaven, as future ; 
Jesus regarded both as ' already come.' If he and 
some of his contemporaries among the Jews drove out 
devils by the Spirit of God, this was a sign that the 
kingdom of God had already come. If John knew that, 
then he believed in Jesus as the Angel-Messiah ; but 
this he certainly did not whilst in prison and shortly 
before his death. Sayings of Jesus have been preserved 
which prove to demonstration, when connected with 
the above facts, that John did not regard Jesus as the 

1 Mish. Sotahy end ; Aboda Sara, xx. (5, &c. 


Messiah, and that Jesus did not regard John as belong- 
ing to his kingdom : ' He that is least in the kingdom 
of heaven is greater than he.' The reason of this is 
implied by another saying of Jesus, hitherto left in the 
dark. The doctrine of the Holy Ghost having been in 
the Old Testament referred to as exceptionally present 
in few individuals, the coming of this Divine power to 
mankind was prophesied as something future. In this 
sense we may interpret the words : ' All the Prophets 
and the law prophesied until John,' him included, for 
even if taken to be Elias he would only be announcing 
the coming of the Messiah with the Holy Spirit from 
above. But ' from the days of John the Baptist until 
now the kingdom of heaven ' is no longer held by all to 
be future, for some enter in, though they can only do 
so ' by force,' since it ' suffereth violence,' that is, it was 
violently closed by the ' blind leaders of the blind,' by 
' the Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites,' who ' shut up 
the kingdom of heaven against men,' neither going in 
themselves, nor 'suffering them that are entering to 
go in. i 

Thus openly and directly did Jesus oppose the 
teaching of John the Baptist about the Spirit of God 
not yet being present in man. He would have opposed 
this his doctrine even in case that John the Ashai or 
the Essai or Essene, had not expected the Messiah or 
' Him that should come,' like the Tathagata of the 
Buddhists, to be the incarnation of an Angel, who 
brought down the Spirit of God. These two doctrines 
stand in connection with each other; and the more 
probable it can be made, that John was an Essene, the 
more certain will it be, that Jesus opposed also the 
Messianic expectation of John the Baptist or the Essene. 
Jesus did not regard himself as the Angel-Messiah ; of 
which doctrine there is no proof in the Old Testament, 
or in the first three Gospels, but which was an Essenic, 

1 Matt. xi. 11-14; xxiii. 13. 



tradition, as the preceding arguments seem irresistibly 
to prove. 

Not only John's ascetic life, his rites, as far as we 
know them, and his doctrines were Essenic, but among 
the incidents transmitted to us of his early life, there 
are some which contain corroborative evidence that he 
was a member of the Essenic body, whose settlements, 
according to the elder Pliny, were on the west coast of 
the Dead Sea. Here had been the settlements of the 
Kenites or Eechabites, who started from Thamar- 
Engedi for Arad, and whom we have sufficient reason 
to connect with the later Essenes. It was in this 
region to the west of the Dead Sea, in the hill country 
of Judah, and in a city called Juda or Jutta, that the 
son of Zacharias and Elisabeth was born. Probably 
this was the city Juta or Jutta, five miles south of 
Hebron, as first suggested by Eeland. It has escaped 
attention, that, like Hebron, Jutta is mentioned in the 
Book of Joshua as one of the cities which were given to 
' the children of Aaron,' from which Zacharias as well 
as Elisabeth were descended. Accordingly John was 
born near the region where the Essenic settlements were. 
The Essenes were in the habit of adopting children, 
and a child of double Aaronic descent, whose aged 
parents may have died before it attained to manhood, 
would be particularly welcomed by the Jewish ascetics. 

Again, it was in this ' wilderness ' of Judaea, that 
' the word of God ' came unto John, whether he began 
to baptize there or not. But as his progress was from 
south to north, it is highly probable that he did first 
baptize in the southern district to the west of the Dead 
Sea, where the Essenic settlements were. For, instead 
of ' Bethabara beyond Jordan,' the original reading may 
have been ' Beth-Arabah beyond Jordan,' that is, ' the 
house of the desert,' — a locality which may be identified 
with the city of that name, mentioned by Joshua, as 
situated ' in the wilderness,' that is, in ' the Arabah ' or 


el-Ghor, in that part of the sunken valley which lies in 
the northern part of the hill country to the west of the 
Dead Sea. Any place situated like Betharabah in this 
part of the sunken valley between the northern end 
and the cliffs ten miles south of the southern end of the 
Dead Sea, could be designated as ' beyond Jordan ; ' 
whilst the deep sunken valley, called ' the Arabah,' in- 
cluded in its wider sense the entire course of the Jordan 
from Mount Hermon. It was therefore necessary to 
give to the place a more restricted meaning ; and the 
designation ' beyond Jordan ' is best explained if we 
assume that Betharabah was meant, whilst it would have 
no meaning if Bethany had been the name of the place, 
which Origen found in the oldest manuscripts, although 
he decided for Bethabarah. 1 

We find, therefore, that John the Baptist was born, 
received his Divine call, and began to baptize in the 
region to the west of the Dead Sea, where the Essenes 
had their settlements ; that like these he lived in secluded 
localities, avoiding the cities, and apparently not even 
going up to Jerusalem for the feast ; that his dress and 
mode of living resembled that of the Essenes, especially 
of hermits like Banus, with whom Josephus spent three 
years, probably the three years of the Essenic noviciate ; 
that, like the Essenes, John was a Nazarite for life, and 
probably avoided the Temple-services and sacrifices ; 
that he did not refer to the Holy Ghost, like the Essenes, 
of whom we may assume that they could not do so be- 
fore the coming of the Angel-Messiah, whom they expected, 
and of whom John said, that he would baptize with the 

1 We cannot accept, with Mr. Conder, for the place intended, the ford or 
Abarah near Beisan, the ancient Bethshean, called Scythopolis, in the Jordan 
valley, about twelve miles south of the Sea of Galilee. Near this place 
was, according to Eusebius and Jerome, the Aenon or Enon, the place of 
springs, near Salim, where, on the west of the Jordan, the last baptisms of 
John took place, and where Van de Velde has found a Mussulman tomb, 
called by the Arabs Sheyhh Salim, the city having- disappeared, like the town 
Antipatris, now Kefr-Saba. (Smith's Diet, of the Bible, l Salim.') 


Holy Ghost ; finally., that John the Baptist is only 
another name for John the Ashai or bather, from 
which the name of the Essai may now be safely assumed 
to have been derived. Considering these many and 
either certain or probable proofs of contact, and that 
there is absolutely nothing known about John the 
Baptist which could be designated as non-Essenic, his 
connection with the Essenes can no longer be doubted. 

Under the circumstances in which the earliest records 
about the life and doctrines of Jesus were composed, it 
must be regarded as a difficult if not an impossible task 
to distinguish the doctrines which he really taught from 
those which to a certain extent, and especially in the 
Gospel after John, have been attributed to him under 
Essenic influence, as we shall try to prove. The Essenic 
Christians must have been as desirous to claim the au- 
thority of Jesus for their views, as they had been zealous 
in developing their system from the Mosaic Scriptures by 
an allegorical interpretation of the same. Yet the prin- 
cipal points in which the doctrine of Jesus was opposed 
to that of the Essenes, and those which were common to 
both, can be ascertained with sufficient accuracy. 

It was not only the Essenic expectation of an Angel- 
Messiah, who would baptize with the Holy Ghost and 
bring to earth the kingdom of heaven, against which 
Jesus protested, whilst excluding John the Baptist from 
the kingdom of God which had already come : Jesus 
protested also against the extreme rigidness of Sabbath 
observance, which was a characteristic custom of the 
Essenes. Also, his views about the import of all outward 
acts connected with religion were much more free. 
Again, the principle of universality, which Jesus enun- 
ciated, implied a protest against the Essenic avoidance of 
strangers, which was likewise a characteristic feature 
among Essenes in Palestine, though not in Egypt. The 
asceticism of the Essenes, their strict rules about eating 
and drinking, their discouraging marriage, and forbid- 


ding the anointing of the head with oil, were not 
sanctioned by Jesus. 1 Whilst in all these points Jesus 
did not follow Essenic doctrines or customs, he strongly 
approved and followed the principle of the Essenes to 
avoid the Temple-service with its bloody sacrifices, the 
Essenic simplicity in speech and demeanour, their prohi- 
bition of oaths and of slavery, respect of poverty, perhaps 
community of goods, and certainly the system of initia- 
tion in the mysteries of tradition. 

The question already here suggests itself, why many 
Essenes accepted Jesus as the Angel-Messiah whom, as 
we tried to show, they expected, although he did not 
belong to their party. Our answer will be, that the death 
of Jesus at the time of the Passover, and his reported 
resurrection ' the third day according to the Scriptures,' 
that is, as the allegorising Essenes explained, both as 
antitype of the Paschal lamb and of the Paschal omer, 
removed in their minds all doubt on the subject. It 
was under the effect of these doubts that John sent the 
embassy to Jesus, whether he be ' He that should come,' 
the Tathagatta of Buddhists, the Angel-Messiah, who 
would baptize with the Holy Ghost. The answer of 
Jesus did not confirm such expectations. 

Jesus and the Hidden Wisdom. 

The Sadducees had forbidden the promulgation of 
the ancestral tradition of the Pharisees. The name of 
the latter can be derived from Pharis or Persia, and, if 
so, would connect the Pharisees, like Jesus, with the 
non-Hebrews or strangers in Israel, to which dualism of 
race in Israel the name of Pharez points. From this it 
would follow, that the ' mysteries of the kingdom of 
heaven,' which Jesus, as is recorded in the first three 
Gospels, made known to his disciples when ' alone ' with 

1 Matt. xii. 1-12; John ix. 14, 16; Matt. xix. 12; vi. 17; Luke 
vii. 46. 


them, that his speaking ' in darkness,' his whisperings 
in the ear, may have referred to a traditional ' key of 
knowledge ' which the spiritual rulers of Israel had ' taken 
away ' from the people. This connection between the 
ancestral tradition of the Pharisees and the secret tradi- 
tion, deeper knowledge or gnosis, taught by Jesus to his 
disciples, and distinguished from his popular form of 
teaching by parables only, is confirmed by Jesus recog- 
nising publicly the Scribes and Pharisees as sitting in 
Moses' seat, as if as organs of a verbal tradition trans- 
mitted by elders. ' All therefore whatsoever they bid 
you observe, that observe and do ; but do not ye after 
their works : for they say, and do not.' Again, Jesus, 
the Scribes, and the Pharisees went to the synagogue; 
the Sadducees not. Jesus has certainly recognised the 
authority of a traditional verbal law by the side of the 
written law ; and we may assume that he regarded the 
fundamental principles of the former as forming canons 
or rules of interpretation for the latter. 

Jesus believed that God reveals himself in all ages 
through his Spirit, that the history of mankind is the 
history of a continuity of Divine influences. The reve- 
lations in ages past had been made known to the people 
through symbols, which were differently explained by 
the Initiated and the Uninitiated. Jesus knew that the 
medium of these revelations was the enlightened con- 
science of man, as the organ of Divine manifestations. 
He regarded it as his mission to point out to every man 
' the engrafted Word ' which is able to save the soul ; to 
convince men ' by their conscience,' at a time when even 
Israelites knew not ' the things belonging to their peace,' 
because they were ' hid ' from their eyes. After a long 
and systematic hiding of the truth, for which Paul made 
Moses responsible, 1 Jesus saw no other way for the ful- 
filment of his Divine mission, than to suggest to the 
people by parables as much of the truth as they could 

1 2 Cor. iii. 12-18; iv. 1-4. 


then bear, and to prepare a chosen number of disciples, 
by secret initiation in the mysteries of the kingdom of 
heaven, for some future time when they or their succes- 
sors might proclaim in light and upon the housetops 
what he had told them in darkness and in the ear. 
Above all, Jesus taught the truth by living it, thus set- 
ting an ensample or pattern that his brethren should 
follow in his footsteps. 

Since the doctrine of the Spirit of God in man had 
been kept in the background by ' the law and the pro- 
phets until John,' the people could not understand and 
profit by what was written about Adam and Eve hearing 
the voice of God ; about Cain's fleeing from God's 
presence ; about the Spirit of God departing from Saul, 
and urging David to repentance ; about the Divine 
origin of man and his walk with God ; about taking in 
vain or unprofitably bearing God's ' Name ' or Spirit, 
which is also in the Angel of the Lord ; about the Word 
which is near to every man, that he may do it ; about 
the law written in the heart ; about ' wickedness con- 
demned by her own witness.' l By preaching and living 
the doctrine of conscience, Jesus opened the way for the 
gradual revelation of the mystery kept in secret since 
the world be^an. 

Jesus and the Sacrifice. 

David, the ancestor of Jesus, and descendant from 
the Iranians, to whom every bloody sacrifice was an 
abomination, had declared that God did not desire sac- 
rifice and offering, neither burnt-offering nor sin-offering ; 
Isaiah had protested against sacrifices, and asked in the 
Name of the Lord, ' Who hath required this at your 
hand ? ' The prayer with the uplifted bloody hand God 
will not hear ; he will forgive sins on the sole condition 
of man's ' ceasing to do evil, and learning to do well.' 

1 Wisd. xvii. 11. 


Jeremiah answers the question raised by Isaiah as to 
who had required the sacrifices from Israel, by the 
declaration that God had ' said nothing ' unto the fathers 
' concerning burnt-offerings or sacrifices,' and that the 
people had walked backward and not forward, since 
God brought them out of Egypt, that is, since the time 
in which the transmitted Scriptures of Moses were held 
to have originated, and up to the day when Jeremiah 
spoke to the children of Israel in vain, because they 
heard not ' the voice of the Lord ' ; finally, Ezechiel had 
proclaimed that man's soul is delivered by man's righ- 
teousness. 1 

Already from these passages we are led to assume 
that Jesus cannot possibly have sanctioned the sacrifices, 
ordered by the Scriptures attributed to Moses. His 
not having ever visited the Temple-services must be re- 
garded as a protest against the bloody sacrifices therein 
offered ; and in the face of such direct opposition to the 
sacrificial and ceremonial ritual, it requires no explana- 
tion why no word of his is recorded, either against the 
sacrifices or in favour of their being regarded as types 
of a bloody death of the Messiah, of a sin-removing, an 
atoning sacrifice. Not even the Targum of Jonathan 
explains the passage in Isaiah about the servant of God 
by a reference to the death of the Messiah, of which 
not a word is contained in the Old Testament. Jesus 
has not designated his death as a condition of redemp- 
tion. He never spoke of his death except in direct 
connection with his life ; he never even hinted at a 
result brought about by his death alone, or by his 
death unconnected with his life. If he has said that he 
came to give his life ' a ransom for many,' he has given 
a figurative expression to the liberation from spiritual 
bondage, which we owe to him, as to the man who 
taught men to believe in the power of God's indwelling 
Spirit. Of a pre-existing Messiah there is no trace in 

1 Ts. xl. 6 j Is. i. 11 f. j Jer. vii. 22-2(3 ; Ez. xiv. 14. 


the first three Gospels, which we here alone consider, if 
we except the passage about the Wisdom of God which 
has sent prophets in all ages, and to which personified 
Wisdom words have been referred by Luke, which 
Matthew had previously recorded as words of Jesus. 1 
The doctrine of the sacrificial death of Jesus as the 
Messiah stands and falls with the doctrine of the 
Angel-Messiah and slain Lamb of God, who existed 
before the foundation of the world. The doctrine of 
the Angel-Messiah can be shown to have been intro- 
duced into Judaism by the Essenes, whose connection 
with the East can be proved. This doctrine seems to 
have been held by John the Baptist, though he did not 
apply it to Jesus, certainly not abidingly, and to have 
been by the latter protested against. If this result can 
be confirmed by the doctrines of Paul and by those 
recorded in the fourth Gospel, when investigated in 
connection with the Essenic doctrine of the Angel- 
Messiah, then it will be proved, that also the doctrine 
of an offended God reconciled by vicarious sacrifice 
was not recognised by Jesus. 

Jesus the Messiah. 

In the Synagogue of Nazareth, at the commence- 
ment of his public teaching, Jesus is by Luke recorded 
to have designated himself as the servant of God, of 
whom the Prophet had said, that the Spirit of God 
should rest on him, because He had anointed him, that 
is, made him a Messiah, to preach the glad tidings of 
the kingdom of heaven, not as an angel to the inhabit- 
ants of the earth, but as man to men. With a direct 
reference, it seems, to the 80th Psalm, Jesus called 
himself ' the son of Man,' because God had made him 
strong for himself, raising him to ' the man of his right 
hand.' Like the Finger of God, the Hand of God is a 

1 Matt, xxiii. 34 ; Luke xi. 49 ; about Psalm ex. see further on. 


figurative expression for the Spirit of God, so that the 
passage about ' the son of Man ' which God's hand had 
raised stands in direct connection with the passage in 
Isaiah which Jesus is recorded to have read at the 
synagogue and to have referred to himself. It is also 
to be connected with the passage in Peter's Pentecostal 
sermon about Jesus raised 'by the right hand of God.' 
The passage about the Son of the right hand of God 
was in the mind of the author of the 110th Psalm, 
written after the Eeturn from Babylon, perhaps on 
the consecration of Joshua, who, like Zerubbabel, 
probably was of Davidic descent. If so, Joshua repre- 
sented, in a direct manner, the strangers in Israel, 
especially the Eechabites. To their ancestor Jonadab, 
Jeremiah had promised, in the Name of God, that he 
' shall not want a man to stand before God for ever.' 
To this the Psalmist refers : 'The Lord hath sworn and 
will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever, after the 
order of Melchizedec' The reference here made to the 
passage in Jeremiah is all the more certain, as the 
priestly order of Melchizedec, the non-Hebrew, may be 
connected with the Eechabites, Kenites or sons of 
Jethro, the non-Hebrew. The lord of the Eechabites 
was Jonadab, and to him God the Lord had said that 
he should ' stand before him ' for ever. The promise 
made to Jonadab would be regarded as fulfilled by 
Joshua on the day of his consecration, when the 
Psalmist, possibly Joshua himself, could say : ' The 
Lord said unto my lord [Jonadab], Sit thou at my right 
hand.' If the Eechabites merged into the Essenic 
order, this passage was sure to be allegorically ex- 
plained with reference to the Angel-Messiah whom the 
Essenes expected, all the more as in the days of Jesus, 
the Psalm was, by the people, believed to have been 
composed by David, who was also a descendant of 
Jonadab, the lord of the Eechabites or Kenites. 1 

1 Jer. xxxv. 18, 10: P 8 . ex. 1, 4. 


We may assume that hopes were entertained that 
the high priest Joshua or Jesus, whom the prophet 
Zechariah describes as ' standing before ' the Angel of 
the Lord, would be not only the fulfiller of the pro- 
phecy made to Jonadab, and thus to the strangers from 
whom David was descended, but also of the prophecy 
made by Nathan to David, that after his death and 
from his seed God would set up a descendant of his, 
a son of David. Of him God said : ' I will be his 
father, and he shall be my son.' Through him David's 
house and kingdom ' shall be established for ever.' A 
Psalmist who contrasted with this promise the appa- 
rently hopeless times preceding the Captivity, refers to 
Nathan's promise when he says of the still-expected son 
of David and Son of God : ' He shall cry unto me, Thou 
art my father, my God, and the rock of my salvation ; 
and I will make him my firstborn, higher than the 
kings of the earth.' And to this son of David and Son 
of God the author of the 2nd Psalm had referred, 
probably at an earlier time, or David himself had done 
so, as stated in the Acts, by saying, ' Thou art my Son, 
this day have I begotten thee.' It was all the more 
natural to refer this to the high priest Joshua, since, 
like the expected descendant of David whom Isaiah had 
called ' the Branch,' and on whom the Spirit of the 
Lord should rest, Joshua did fulfil Nathan's prophecy, 
as Solomon had done before, by building a house of 
God. Indeed, the prophet Zechariah actually designates 
Joshua as ' the man whose name is the Branch.' 1 

In the Old Testament there is not one single passage 
about the promised Son of God which ought to be discon- 
nected from Nathan's promise of a son of David and 
Son of God. After the introduction, almost certainly 
by the Essenes, of the new doctrine of the Angel- 
Messiah, the Messianic attribute, ' the son of God, 

1 2 Sam. vii. L2- 14; Ps. Ixxxix. 26, 27; Ps. ii. 7; Is. xi. 1-2; lxi. 
1-2; Zech. vi. 11,12. 


received a new interpretation. Although not directly 
either in the first three Gospels or the Acts, yet ' the 
son of God ' was in Paulinic writings and in the fourth 
Gospel referred to a superhuman individual, to a man 
not born of human parents, but who had for a time 
given up his celestial abode, where he was the first of 
seven Angels, and by whom the world had been created. 
At first, as by Paul in one passage, the celestial son of 
God was identified with the son of David. The first 
recorded assertion that Jesus was the Son of God but 
4 not the son of David,' as the ' wicked ' Jews maintained, 
is found in the Epistle of Barnabas transmitted to us, 
which the Alexandrian Clement, Origen, and Eusebius 
cite as a writing of the Apostle Barnabas. The essen- 
tially Essenic and anti-Gentile character of this Epistle 
confirms the hypothesis that the Essenes introduced 
the new doctrine of the Angel-Messiah, and with it the 
doctrine of the atoning death of Messiah, into Judaism 
and Christianity. In the sense of Nathan's prophecy 
Jesus called himself the Son of God. This will be con- 
firmed by a full consideration of the question whether 
Essenic influences may not be traced back to the com- 
position of the Gospels and Pauline Epistles, especially 
of the Epistle to the Hebrews, as the bishop and church- 
historian Eusebius suggests we must do. We saw that 
having identified the Therapeuts of Philo with the Chris- 
tian ascetics, Eusebius adds : ' It is highly probable that 
the ancient commentaries which he (Philo) says they 
have, are the very Gospels and writings of the Apostles, 
and probably some expositions of the ancient Prophets, 
such as are contained in the Epistle to the Hebrews 
and many others of St. Paul's Epistles.' 1 

Jesus was crucified because he himself or others 
called him ' king of the Jews,' as the inscription on his 
cross announced. It is possible that he regarded him- 
self as the son of David and Son of God to which the 
1 Hist. Eccl. ii. 1 7. 


recorded prophecy of Nathan referred, though it seemed 
to have been fulfilled by Solomon, and had last been 
applied to the high priest Joshua. If Jesus really did 
expect a Messiah, as most Jews seem to have done, and 
if he regarded himself as Him that should come, he may 
have thought that the spiritual kingdom which it was 
his mission to found, could be easier established by his 
accepting, in harmony with Nathan's prophecy, the dig- 
nity of ' king of the Jews,' which multitudes were eager 
to confer on him. Indeed, what is recorded about the 
triumphant entry into Jerusalem shows that probably 
the majority of the people in Jerusalem received him 
with royal honours as the promised son of David and 
Messiah-King, who came in the Name of the Lord, that 
the entire city was in commotion and said, ' This is 
Jesus, the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee.' The spiri- 
tual rulers of Israel spoke of ' all the world ' following 
him ; we may therefore assume some of the Essenes to 
have followed in his train. According to Luke ' many ' 
had joined him from Jericho, near to the Essenic settle- 
ments. In the fourth Gospel it is stated, that shortly 
before his entry into Jerusalem Jesus had gone ' beyond 
Jordan, into the place where John at first baptized,' and 
that ' many believed on him there.' It is even possible 
that these disciples of John who followed Jesus — it is 
possible that Essenes had helped to bring about, if not 
to prepare, his triumphant entry into Jerusalem, which 
Jesus could not have prevented. 

The secret society of the Essenes, spread over Pales- 
tine, Egypt and other countries, and based on the non- 
recognition of the Temple-services and of private 
property, had become a standing danger to the recog- 
nised theocratic institutions of Israel. Although not 
sanctioning, but opposing the Essenic expectations of an 
Angel-Messiah, Jesus had abstained from any partici- 
pation in the Temple-services, as the Essenes had always 
done, and the worship in the synagogues which he en- 


couraged by his teaching was in harmony with some of 
the fundamental principles of the Essenes. A public 
recognition of Jesus in the streets of Jerusalem, secretly 
planned and effectually supported by the multitude to 
whom he was so well known, might lead to the aboli- 
tion of the Temple-services and to their being supplanted 
by the Synagogue. This must have paved the way to a 
more or less Essenic reformation of Judaism. If he 
placed himself at the head of such a movement, Jesus 
may have hoped to remove the errors of the Essenian 
creed, especially the expectation of an Angel-Messiah. 

The prohibition which Jesus is said to have ad- 
dressed to his disciples, that they should ' tell no man ' 
that he was the Messiah, could hardly be explained by 
the assumption that these words were attributed to 
Jesus by those who, like the Essenes, wished to prove 
that he had secretly taught the doctrine of the Angel- 
Messiah, of which there is no trace in the first three 
Gospels. But if Jesus did give this command about 
secreting the most important doctrine, that is, his 
relation to the Messianic expectations of his time, we 
might assume that Jesus took precautions against his 
being regarded as the Messiah in a sense contrary to 
that which he could approve. He certainly did not 
wish to be proclaimed as the Angel-Messiah whom the 
disciples of John or the Essenes expected. Even were we 
to assume that Jesus thought the setting up of his 
spiritual kingdom might have been facilitated by his 
accepting the kingship of the Jews, his motives for 
doing so would have had to be kept secret by the few 
to whom lie would naturally have confided and who 
would have understood them. All his disciples knew 
that he was watched by emissaries from the ruling 
Sadducees, who would have gladly espied some words 
from him about his relation to the different Messianic 
expectations. In the fourth Gospel it is implied by words 
of Jesus that he was accused to have taught certain 


doctrines * in secret ' only. The Sadducees, who be- 
lieved not in angels or spirits, as Josephus states, had 
good reasons to oppose even an indirect spreading of the 
secretly promulgated Essenic doctrine about the An^el- 

The mysterious betrayal of Jesus by Judas may have 
been connected with a breach of trust in this very 
point, with Judas disobeying his master's injunction, not 
to tell any man that he was the Christ. At all events, 
it was not worth even ' thirty pieces of silver ' — the price 
given for the liberation of a slave — to inform the recog- 
nised authorities at Jerusalem where Jesus was, who 
had publicly entered the city, and was daily visited by 
multitudes on the Mount of Olives. But it was very 
important for the ruling Sadducees to know what 
secret instructions, if any, Jesus had given to his dis- 
ciples about his Messianic views, and what plans the 
Essenes might have projected to set him up as king 
of the Jews. The appointed guardians of the Temple 
had weighty reasons not to underrate the triumphant 
entry of Jesus into Jerusalem, nor the possible conse- 
quences of so unexpected a demonstration, perhaps 
secretly prepared by Essenes. Even if Jesus should not 
assume the offered title and dignity of king of the Jews, 
and even if he should discourage the secret Messianic 
expectations of the disciples of John, that is, of the 
Essenes, as Jesus would certainly have done, still he was 
sure to continue in his hostility against the Temple- 
services. The Synagogue, which the ruling Sadducees 
did not visit, might have been raised to the dignity of 
the Temple ; the latter degraded to a synagogue without 
priests ; and the Scribes and Pharisees might have been 
acknowledged by all as sitting in the seat of Moses, 
as the sole authority with regard to doctrine. If Judas 
could prove by his evidence that Jesus had spoken in 
secret to the disciples about his Messiahship, the only 
possible accusation of the authorities could succeed, that 



Jesus, by allowing himself to be proclaimed as king of 
the Jews, had made himself the enemy of Cassar. Then 
it would be easy to bring about a popular riot, a sham 
trial, the condemnation and crucifixion. 

When this had been accomplished, perhaps with the 
direct assistance of the only non-Galilean disciple of 
Jesus, by Judas, the man of Kerioth in Judah, who 
accused himself of having betrayed innocent blood, all 
fears of the Sadducees seemed to be over. His disciples 
forsook him and fled. The words which Jesus is re- 
corded to have spoken on the cross : ' My God, why 
hast thou forsaken me ? ' can only be referred to the 
apparent failure of his mission. In the eyes of the 
world God had forsaken him, by not granting any 
immediate success. 

In the latest revised Gospel Jesus is recorded to have 
said : ' ^Behold your house is left (or rather, shall be 
left) unto you desolate (or deserted), for I say unto you, 
ye shall not see me henceforth till ye shall say : Blessed 
is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.' If Jesus 
has said this, he has confirmed the recorded prophetic 
visions about a Messiah at Jerusalem, whether himself or 
not, who shall come in the Name or Spirit of the Lord 
after the desolation of Israel's house by the Eomans, or 
at a still later desolation of the country. Then Jesus 
will be seen, in the form of visions or otherwise. In 
the same Gospel the Messianic time is connected with 
the rising of nation against nation, with wrong inter- 
pretations of Messianic prophecies, especially with 
Christ's being ' in the desert,' possibly in the wilderness 
where the Essenes lived. ' The son of man,' or Messiah, 
is to come suddenly with the clouds of heaven, as 
lightning does, and lus sign shall appear in heaven, and 
all the tribes of the earth shall see ' the son of man 
coming in the clouds of heaven with power and 
great glory.' This fulfilment of the Danielic vision is to 
come to pass ' immediately after the tribulations of 

tiif: son OF .MAX. 168 

those days,' — probably the Roman conquest. But in 
Luke the coming of the son of man is deferred to 
an uncertain time ; and the fourth Gospel is silent on 
the supposed and expected bodily reappearance of 
Jesus as Angel-Messiah in glory. And yet we should 
expect that in this Gospel of types and anti-types the 
future coming of the Angel-Messiah would be especially 
referred to as the fulfilment of the Jewish feast of 
tabernacles, ' the feast of in-gathering,' and ' the latter- 
day glory,' ushered in by the conversion of all nations. 
Only in one sense can Jesus have regarded himself 
as the promised and generally expected Messiah. We 
have seen that Messianic conceptions were prevalent in 
the East before the commencement of Jewish history, 
and that the last of the expected incarnations of an 
Angel-Messiah was by many believed to have been 
Gautama-Buddha, born about 500 years before Jesus. 
Neither the Scriptures of the Old Testament transmitted 
to us, although they were not finally revised till after 
the Return from Babylon, and partly not before the time 
of Alexander, nor the first three Gospels, contain a clear 
reference to an Angel-Messiah. But it is evident that 
the vision recorded in the Book of Daniel about one 
; like ' a son of man brought before God on the clouds 
of heaven must be and was referred to a superhuman 
being. We have not here to consider whether or not 
this vision had for its source the Eastern expectation of 
an Angel-Messiah, which prevailed in Mesopotamia in 
ancient times, and was represented by the Essenes and 
probably the Rechabites. It is certain that not one of the 
passages which have been Messianically interpreted and 
which can possibly have been written before the Return 
from Babylon, refers to the expected Messiah as an 
incarnate Angel. In all passages which provably refer 
to earlier times the Messiah is designated as a descen- 
dant from David, on whom the Spirit of God would rest, 
as an anointed man, and thus Son of God. The first three 


Gospels connect Jesus with no other than with this 
Messianic expectation. 

If the tradition recorded in the Gospel after Luke is 
historical, Jesus has announced himself in his synagogal 
address at Nazareth as the expected Messiah, seen by 
the Prophets, as the promised son of David and Son of 
God, as the fulfiller of the prophecies of Nathan and 
other seers. It may be urged that even this identifica- 
tion by Jesus is doubtful, inasmuch as Matthew and 
Mark say nothing about it, whilst in the fourth Gospel, 
which, like the third, we shall connect with Essenic 
sources, Jesus is by revelation pointed out to the Baptist 
as the fulfiller of Messianic prophecies, as he on whom 
John would see the Spirit of God descend and rest. 
Whether Jesus did or did not connect himself with this 
servant of God, with this anointed man, as Joshua had 
before been connected, Jesus certainly recognised that 
he was moved to do God's will by the Spirit of God. 
Jesus declared that he and some of his contemporaries 
drove out devils or evil spirits by the good spirit, and 
that it was a sin ' against the Holy Ghost ' to say that 
he and they did so by the evil spirit. To attri- 
bute good to evil, or, we may add, to attribute evil to 
good, Jesus declared to be a sin which would not be 
forgiven, which would have consequences in this world 
and in the world to come. 

To drive out of man the spirit of evil, to bring him 
under the direction of the spirit of good, and thus to 
establish a communion between man and God, who is a 
Spirit, this is to place man under the conditions which 
are essential to that development of which his nature is 
capable in the terrestrial and in the non-terrestrial 
phases of his existence. Like the magnet, man possesses 
an attracting and a repelling force ; he can attract and 
repel both good and evil influences, thus placing himself 
under the guidance of higher or lower, of the highest 
and of the lowest organs of the Divine Spirit which in a 


mysterious way proceeds from the personal God, whom 
no man has seen or can see. It depends on man's will 
to do or not to do the will of the Father of all spirits, of 
Him whom Jesus called the only One who is good. It 
is the gift of God that the Spirit from above has shone 
in all ages as the light of men, and presumably of all 
reasonable creatures in other stars. But few knew that 
there is a Holy Ghost, fewer still were guided by the 
power of God, and from the people this saving know- 
ledge had been hidden, the ' key of knowledge ' had 
been taken away. ' The law and the Prophets until 
John,' him included, had prophesied about the future 
coming of the Holy Ghost, they had ' shut up the 
kingdom of heaven unto men,' and Jesus declared 
that John the Baptist did not belong to that spiritual 

Eevealing the presence of the Spirit of God, declaring 
and proving by word and deed that the kingdom of 
God has already come, baptizing with the Holy Ghost, 
Jesus said : Come unto me, take my yoke upon you 
(the uniting yoke of God's Spirit), learn of me how to 
obey the Spirit of God, and ye shall find rest unto your 
souls. Jesus taught and lived this new doctrine of God's 
anointing Spirit. In the face of erroneous doctrines 
about the Spirit of God and the Messiah, Jesus regarded 
it as his mission to preach by word and deed the presence 
of the Spirit of God in mankind, the universality and 
all-sufficiency of the Saviour of all ages. In this sense, 
Jesus came to save that which was lost ; he was the 
Saviour of mankind who came in the Name or Spirit of 
the Lord. As a chosen instrument of that saving power 
by which God had anointed him or made him a Christ, 
as the man who denounced the law and the Prophets 
for having prophesied about the future coming, whilst 
not pointing to the present working of God's Spirit in 
the flesh — in short, as the anointed Man, not as an 
anointed Angel, Jesus was and is the Christ. 


( '(inclusion. 

The transmitted records of man's history admit of 
the conclusion that Jesus of Nazareth was the man who 
readied the ideal of humanity, the One who obtained 
the prize in the race of the many. By obediently fol- 
lowing the dictates of his enlightened conscience, the 
same had become the hallowed deposit of Divine revela- 
tions. Acquainted with the capabilities and wants of 
the human frame, Jesus fulfilled and delegated to his 
brethren the highest moral law of which the earth-born 
son of man is capable. What Jesus has left to mankind 
is an example which we can follow. We can follow 
him in the regeneration, in the Divine Sonship, for with 
our great ancestor we are ' participators of the Divine 
nature.' God speaks to us through his Spirit, as He 
spoke to Jesus and to ancestors of his in all ages. For 
those who have been born again by the greatest of 
miracles, for those who have been renewed in the spirit 
of their minds, the miraculous attestations of God never 
cease, they know that their life is a link in the chain of 
past and of future developments. 

Unless Ave are prepared to deny the humanity of 
Jesus, we must accept as a fact that, he also com- 
menced his life in ignorance, that he passed a period of 
doubt, and finally saw, seized, and lived the truth. Not 
even in the case of the most perfect man, of One who 
received the Holy Ghost ' without measure,' and whom 
God ' anointed with the Holy Ghost and with power,' 
can we imagine — not even of such a son of God dare we 
assert — a progress in his spiritual development without 
error, a progress in his moral evolution without combat. 
We must distinguish error from sin. The nature of sin 
is not error ; but it is the denial by word and deed of 
what the responsible being knows to be truth. We 
cannot assume that the conscience of Jesus was some- 
thing given him without his co-operation, something 


which was from the beginning perfect. We must regard 
his conscience as a gradual and normal development of 
the moral germ with which he was born, of the moral 
law written by God on the tables of his heart. Man is 
a co-operator in the redemption from the evils to which 
his nature is exposed. Jesus was no exception to this 
rule, notwithstanding his Messianity and Divinity. 

The kingdom of heaven preached by Jesus is not 
the kingdom of the Angel-Messiah as preached by John 
the Baptist or Essene. The New Covenant is the cove- 
nant of a good conscience with God. Herein lies the 
efficacy of Christ's redemption, the world-conquering 
power of Christianity. 




The Hellenists — The person of Christ — Christ and the Spirit of God — The 
resurrection of Christ — Apparitions of Jesus after death — The day of 
Pentecost — The Atonement — Conclusion. 

The Hellenists. 

Jesus had opposed some of the doctrines of John the 
Baptist or Essene, and so the twelve Apostles opposed 
some of the doctrines of Paul, at least, during the seven- 
teen years previous to his recognition as an Apostle. 
Paul was by birth a Pharisee, and the ruling Sadducees 
had appointed him as chief agent for the persecution 
which arose ' because of Stephen.' We may assume 
that Saul of Tarsus in Cilicia was among the men of 
Cilicia who disputed with Stephen, ' a man full of faith 
and of the Holy Ghost,' having done ' great wonders 
and miracles among the people.' Stephen was the first 
of those ' seven men of honest report, full of the Holy 
Ghost and wisdom ' whom the Grecians or Hellenists, 
that is, Greek-speaking Jews at Jerusalem, had elected 
among themselves to be ' appointed ' by the Apostles 
over the business of daily ministration or assistance to 
Grecian widows. These Grecians assembled in one or 
more synagogues of their own at Jerusalem, and among 
them were Alexandrians. Here it was that those who 
disputed with Stephen ' were not able to resist the 
wisdom and the spirit by which he spake.' The ' mur- 
muring ' between Grecians and Hebrews, which seems 
at first not to have been connected with doctrine, made 
way for the accusation of Stephen before the council, 


who was charged with having spoken 'blasphemous 
words against Moses and against God.' 

According to Eabbinical tradition there were 480 
synagogues at Jerusalem, and yet no Gentile was ever 
admitted as member of any synagogue. The Alexan- 
drians who disputed with Stephen were therefore cer- 
tainly Greek-speaking Jews of Alexandria. A few miles 
from Alexandria was the chief settlement of the Essenian 
Therapeuts, and it is highly probable that some of 
them, like the ' Greeks,' had ' come up to worship at 
the feast.' Such Jewish Therapeuts of Alexandria 
would be included in the general designation ' Alexan- 
drians.' Stephen himself, the Greek-speaking JeAV, 
who, like his brethren, bore a Greek name, might have 
been an Essenic Therapeut. It can be proved by two 
facts that Stephen was an Essene. In his speech he 
designates Jesus as the Angel who was with the fathers 
in the wilderness. But the expectation of an Angel- 
Messiah cannot be shown to have ever prevailed among 
any orthodox party in Israel ; whereas weighty reasons 
permit us to assume that the doctrine of the Angel- 
Messiah existed as secret tradition among the Essenes of 
the pre-Christian and of the Apostolic times. The ruling 
Sadducees were obliged to oppose this doctrine with all 
their might, not only because they believed neither in 
angels or spirits, whilst forbidding the Pharisees to 
promulgate their ancestral tradition, but because the 
Scriptures which the Sadducees recognised do not point 
by a single word to an Angel-Messiah. It would there- 
fore appear as possible that the j^ersecution of Stephen 
and of his companions in the faith had been chiefly 
caused by the new doctrine about the Angel-Messiah as 
applied to Jesus. 

The speech of Stephen, as recorded in the Acts, 
shows that he did apply to Jesus the exclusively Essenic 
doctrine of the Angel-Messiah. Jesus Christ is by 
Stephen identified with the ' Angel of the Lord ' who 


appeared to Moses * in a flame of fire in a bush,' and 
from which ' the voice of the Lord came unto him.' 
By the hand of this Angel God had sent Moses as ruler 
and deliverer. The Prophet like unto Moses which God 
should raise among Israel, was by Stephen identified 
with the Angel of God who had spoken to Moses in the 
Mount Sinai, and with the fathers, and through whom 
Moses had received lively oracles, or living words, to 
give unto Israel. But the fathers of Israel would not 
obey Moses, and thus they rejected the revelation of 
the Angel of God. 1 Stephen implies with sufficient 
clearness that if the fathers had obeyed Moses, and thus 
the Angel who spoke to him on Sinai, Israel might then 
have received the gift of the Divine Spirit through the 
Angel. But Israel's fathers and their descendants have 
' always resisted the Holy Ghost.' Israel's fathers have 
persecuted all the Prophets, and they have slain those 
' which showed before of the coming of the Just One,' 
of whom the Israelitic contemporaries of Stephen have 
been ' the betrayers and murderers.' Stephen, so con- 
tinues the recorder, ' being full of the Holy Ghost, looked 
up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, 
and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, and said, 
Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man 
standing on the right hand of God.' Having prayed to 
the ' Lord Jesus ' that he would receive his spirit, and 
that he woidd not lay this sin to the charge of them 
who stoned him, the first Christian martyr fell asleep. 

According to his own statement, Saul of Tarsus was 
the young man whose name was Saul, at whose feet, 
according to a still prevailing custom, the witnesses had 
laid down their clothes, before throwing the first stones 
on the man condemned as worthy of death. 2 The man 
from Cilicia, who had heard, and probably taken part in 
the disputations with Stephen — he who had heard his 

1 Gomp. Deut. xxxiii. 2-5 in the Septuagint version ; Gal. iii. 19. 

2 Deut. xvii. (5, 7. 


defence, also heard, as the representative of the Jewish 
authorities, when he was stoned, his confession of faith in 
the risen Jesus as the Angel-Messiah promised by Moses, 
according to Stephen's interpretation. This doctrine, 
which is contrary to the letter and spirit of the Mosaic 
Scriptures, we must connect, as with the Essenes, the 
only Jews who have held it, so at least with some of the 
Hellenists whom Stephen represented. Stephen is not 
likely to have been the only one among the Grecians 
who expected an Angel-Messiah, and who regarded 
Jesus as the same. 

We know not how long before his martyrdom 
Stephen was elected as the first of the seven deacons, 
but we are told, that ' the whole multitude ' at 
Jerusalem was pleased with their elections, that ' the 
word of God increased ; and the number of the disciples 
multiplied in Jerusalem greatly ; and a great company 
of the priests were obedient to the faith.' This account 
is evidently written with a view to the harmonising 
objects of the Acts, which are attributed in their present 
form to Luke. In his earlier written Gospel Luke had 
not dared openly to assert what he, like Paul, must 
have believed, that Jesus was the incarnate Angel of 
God. Yet Luke implied as much when attributing, as 
he is recorded to have done, words of Jesus to the 
' Wisdom of God,' who had sent the Prophets in all ages. 
' The faith ' of the disciples of Jesus at Jerusalem is in 
the Acts implied to have been one and the same, that 
is, the faith in Jesus as the Angel-Messiah. If so, the 
faith of the twelve Apostles, of Stephen and of Paul, 
would have been one and the same ; and it would be in- 
explicable that there is no trace of such doctrine in any 
of the Scriptures composed before the deportation to 
Babylon, or in the first three Gospels, with the sole 
exception of the passage just cited, which Luke or a 
later reviser has freely enlarged after Matthew's record. 
It would seem that the Essenic and Hellenistic 


teaching about the Angel-Messiah had already become 
very popular when Herod Agrippa became Eoman 
governor of Judasa. His mother was a Jewess, being 
descended from the Maccabees, whose allies were the 
Assidseans or Essenes. Although Herod encouraged the 
Nazarites, with whom the Essenes were indirectly con- 
nected by their austere mode of life, it would be 
impossible to assume that the zealous defender of the 
Mosaic law held or favoured the Essenic doctrine about 
the Angel-Messiah. So popular seems to have been 
this doctrine, the doctrine of Stephen, that the sudden 
death of Herod was attributed to the Angel of God with 
whom Stephen had identified the risen Jesus. 

It is probable that Stephen's martyrdom took place, 
in the year of accession of Herod Agrippa, and at the 
commencement of the first year of his reign of three 
years. Since Saul was converted in the year of Stephen's 
death, the three years which Paul spent in Arabia 
before he returned to Jerusalem are best explained by 
the supposition that, so long as this despot lived, the 
man who had been sent from Jerusalem as a persecutor 
and had become a convert could not have shown him- 
self in that city. Probably, therefore, in the year a.d. 41, 
the great persecution ' about Stephen ' commenced, and, 
according to the Acts, it was directed against all the 
members of ' the Church which was at Jerusalem ' ; 
these were ' all scattered abroad throughout the regions 
of Judgea and Samaria, except the Apostles.' It is diffi- 
cult to explain this remarkable exception, unless on the 
ground of the supposition that Stephen had been put to 
death and his followers scattered for spreading doctrines 
not recognised by the Apostles. The fierce attack of 
Stephen against the fathers of Israel must have been 
condemned by the Apostles as much as by the high 
priest, whose right hand Herod Agrippa seems to have 
been. The Apostles could become objects of persecution 
only in so far as they had not up to this time worshipped 


at the Temple, but in the synagogue only. They could 
not be made answerable for what Stephen had taught. 
On the contrary, they must have opposed his doctrine 
of the Angel-Messiah as one which Jesus had not recog- 
nised, as the first three Gospels clearly prove. That 
James was beheaded and Peter imprisoned by Herod 
Agrippa may be sufficiently explained by their not 
having worshipped in the Temple any more than Jesus 
had done so. 

Previous to the death of Stephen, during the seven 
to nine years after the crucifixion of Jesus, which 
probably took place at Easter in the year 35, the 
deacons or overseers of the Hellenists must have had a 
considerable following at Jerusalem. We may safely 
assume that already then, if not ever since the death 
of Jesus, Stephen had proclaimed him at Jerusalem as 
the Angel-Messiah of the Essenes and Therapeuts. It 
is even probable that among the very small number of 
' about one hundred and twenty ' disciples who assem- 
bled at Jerusalem a few days after the crucifixion, if 
not already the next day, on the 16th Nisan, the day 
of the presentation of the firstling-sheaf, there were 
some, and perhaps many Essenes, who regarded Jesus 
as the Angel-Messiah. We may even conjecture that 
this very limited association consisted chiefly of Essenes, 
and did not include many who, like the Apostles, as we 
here assume, regarded Jesus as the promised anointed 
Man, without believing that ' a new religion was to be 
set up in the world,' or that ' the professors of that 
religion were to be distinguished from the rest of 
mankind.' 1 

After that which the Apostles regarded as idle tales 
about what women had first declared to have seen at 
the grave, even after the well attested apparitions of 
Jesus, many would require additional evidence, such as 
the recorded miraculous fulfilment of the Jewish Pente- 

1 Paley, Evidences of Christianity, ix. 


costal type, before they could join those who first 
believed in Jesus as the antitype of the Paschal omer. 
On that Pentecostal day, the tenth day after the ascen- 
sion of Jesus, according to the Acts, ' about three 
thousand souls ' were added to the first association, and 
soon after this ' the number of the men was about 
five thousand.' l If the Apostles had been believers in 
the Messianic doctrines of Stephen, they could hardly 
have remained at Jerusalem whilst the followers of 
Stephen were scattered abroad. Had they regarded 
Jesus not as the anointed man, the son of David and 
Son of God of Messianically interpreted prophecies, 
but had the Apostles regarded him as the anointed 
Angel, of whom the Scriptures before the deportation 
to Babylon say nothing, they might have been accused, 
like Stephen, of having spoken ' blasphemous words ' 
against the holy place and the law. 

The assertion shall now be more minutely con- 
firmed, that there was an essential difference between 
the doctrines of the twelve Apostles and those of 
Stephen about Jesus as the Messiah. We have already 
seen that if the twelve Apostles did, like Stephen, 
believe in Jesus as the Angel-Messiah, it would be 
apparently inexplicable why there should be no trace 
in the first three Gospels of Jesus having recognised 
such a doctrine, on which all Scriptures possibly com- 
posed before the deportation to Babylon are silent. 

There can be no doubt as to the identity of the 
Messianic conceptions of Paul and those of Stephen. 
We shall see that when Paul refers to Christ as the 
spiritual Eock which followed the Israelites, he points 
to the Amrel who had been with the fathers in the 

1 It is curious that the Esaenie corporation is, by Josephus, reported to 
have numbered about 4,000 associates, and that the appointment of deacons 
is connected with the days when the number of disciples was multiplied, as 
if these had been in great part Hellenists, among whom we may assume 

Paul's conversion. 175 

wilderness, and that he identifies Jesus with that 
Angel as Stephen had done. Paul acknowledges that 
during the persecution which arose about Stephen 
he accepted the faith which once he destroyed. On 
his way to Damascus, with the dying words of Stephen 
still ringing in his ears, impressed by the martyr's vision 
of Jesus, of the Angel-Messiah standing at the right hand 
of God, Paul had also a vision. Suddenly a light from 
heaven shone about him, he fell to the ground, and 
heard a voice saying unto him, ' Saul, Saul, why perse- 
cutest thou me ? ' Using the word of Stephen, he at 
once addressed the speaker from heaven as 'Lord,' 
whereupon he was told that it was Jesus of Nazareth 
who had appeared to him. Not having been prepared, 
as Paul was by Stephen, the men that were with him, 
though they saw the light, ' heard not the voice ' of 
him that spake to the conscience-stricken persecutor of 
Stephen's Lord. Nor were Paul's companions blinded 
by the light which they saw, but they led Paul by the 
hand to Damascus, the place appointed him in the 
vision. After having been blind for three days, one 
Ananias, a ' disciple ' of Jesus, came unto him by a 
Divine command communicated in a vision, and said, 
' Brother Saul, receive thy sight,' and at the same hour 
Saul looked up upon him. His sight had returned, and 
he was filled with the Holy Ghost, for which reason 
Ananias had been sent by Jesus. Ananias announced 
to him that the God of the fathers had chosen him 
that lie should know his will and see ' that Just One,' 
that he should hear the voice of his mouth, and be his 
witness, being baptized and having his sins washed 
away. This water-baptism was regarded by John the 
Essene as the symbol of the Holy Ghost which Paul 
received through the mediation of Ananias at the bid- 
ding of Jesus. 

As Paul followed Stephen in calling the speaker 
from heaven ' Lord,' so Ananias called him, like Stephen, 


' the Just One.' As did John the Baptist and all the 
Essenes, Ananias regarded water-baptism as a type of the 
washing away of sins, by the Messianic baptism with 
the Holy Ghost. We are therefore led to expect, that 
Ananias, who is designated as ' a devout man according 
to the law, having a good report of all the Jews ' at 
Damascus, may have represented the Judaism of the 
Essenes, who neither accepted circumcision nor the 
Temple-ritual with its sacrifices, but who preached 
righteousness by faith in the Angel-Messiah. According 
to Paul's own narrative, Ananias was instrumental in 
God's revealing his ' Son ' in the heart of him who had 
been the chief instrument in persecuting the believers 
in Jesus as the Angel-Messiah. 

It can be proved, from a statement transmitted by 
Josephus, that soon after the time of Paul's conversion, 
a Jew called Ananias, who had come to Adiabene, one 
of the Mesopotamian kingdoms, there preached righ- 
teousness not by the works of the law but by faith, as 
Paul did ; whilst another Jew at Adiabene denied that 
this was a purer faith, and insisted on the works of the 
law. It was ' upon the death of King Agrippa,' or 
about the year a.d. 44, that is, at the utmost three 
years after Paul had met Ananias of Damascus, that a 
Jewish merchant Ananias said to King Izates of Adia- 
bene, ' that he might worship God without being cir- 
cumcised, even though he did resolve to follow the 
Jewish law entirely, which worship of God was of a 
superior nature to circumcision.' Yet another Jew, 
Eleazar, ' who was esteemed very skilful in the learning 
of his country,' persuaded Izates to be circumcised, by 
showing him from the law what great impiety he would 
be guilty of by neglecting this Divine command. Jose- 
phus, who had probably passed three years as an Essenic 
novice with Banus, adds that God preserved Izates from 
all dangers, demonstrating thereby, that ' the fruit of 
piety (the ' chassidout ' of the Essenes or Assidreans) 


does not perish, as to those that have regard to him and 
fix their faith upon him only.' 1 

Ananias may have gone from the commercial city of 
Damascus to Adiabene ; and this merchant-missionary, 
who reminds ns of Mahomed, may have been the same 
' disciple ' of Jesus who very shortly, at the utmost only 
a few years before, had been the instrument of Paul's 
conversion in the street called Straight. This possible 
identity is confirmed in a remarkable manner by the 
merchant Ananias at Adiabene having proclaimed the 
same fundamental truths which the disciple Ananias at 
Damascus, and afterwards Paul, preached. At all events, 
it is proved by this narrative, that about the time of 
Paul's conversion two parties opposed each other among 
the Jews ; and that the one party, represented by one 
who seems to have been an Essene, whilst being a disciple 
of Jesus, taught the doctrine, later promulgated by Paul, 
about righteousness without the deeds of the law, espe- 
cially without circumcision. 

This higher kind of Judaism, this deeper knowledge 
or gnosis, cannot be asserted to have been recognised 
and practised by any party in Israel, except by the 
Essenes. Even of the Apostles at Jerusalem this cannot 
be proved. Such was the higher Judaism which the 
Essenes had by allegorical explanations harmonised with 
Mosaic writings, and it was openly declared in the 
presence of Paul by Ananias of Damascus. We may 
with almost certainty assume that Ananias of Damascus 
was an Essenic disciple of Jesus, for we know that lie, 
like Stephen, regarded him as the Angel-Messiah who 
was expected by the Essenes only, and to whom, there- 
fore, Ananias, like Stephen, must have belonged. It 
cannot be shown, nor is it at all probable, that Ananias, 
as the human instrument in the conversion of Paul, 
stood in any connection with the Apostles at Jerusalem, 
with Peter, and 'the other Jews,' as Paul calls them, 

1 Jos. Anliq. xx. 2. 



who solemnly declares to have been ' independent ' of 
them, and that they taught him ' nothing new ' when, 
seventeen years after his conversion, he met them at 
Jerusalem. 1 

The scattered Hellenists ' went everywhere preach- 
ing the word,' some going as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus, 
and Antioch, preaching ' to Jews only,' that is, probably 
to such who, like the Essenes of Judaea, excluded the 
Gentiles, whilst others in that city ' spake unto the 
Grecians,' or Greek-speaking Jews who admitted Gen- 
tiles, 'preaching the Lord Jesus.' 2 This statement in 
the Acts, which distinguishes Hebrew Jews from Greek 
Jews, tends to support the view we wish to establish, 
that ' the persecution that arose about Stephen ' was 
directed chiefly, though not solely, against Grecians 
who were Therapeuts, whose doctrine about the Angel- 
Messiah Stephen had applied to Jesus, whether he was 
the first to do so or not. For, as in Antioch some of 
those persecuted preached to Jews only, being particu- 
larists like the Essenes of Judaea, so there were others in 
that city among those who were persecuted because of 
Stephen, who preached like him ' the Lord Jesus ' to 
Greek-speaking Jews or Hellenists, among whom there 
probably were Alexandrians and universalist Thera- 
peuts. The Hand of the Lord — his Spirit was with these 
preachers at Antioch, so that a great number believed. 
These two parties among the scattered Jews at Antioch, 
we distinguish as Essenes of Palestine who admitted 
Jews only, and as Therapeuts who also admitted Gen- 
tiles. Among them there existed the same difference 
as between the two Jewish teachers at Adiabene and 
between the two principal prophets of Antioch, Barna- 
bas and Paul. The Church at Antioch, where the 
disciples were first called Christians, was founded in 
absolute independence of the Apostles at Jerusalem, 
and the same was the case with Paul's conversion. The 

1 Gal. i. 1G: ii. (3. * Actg xi- 19 _oo. 


Twelve were not scattered when certain (Essenic?) 
disciples — when followers of Stephen — went to Antioch, 
and the Apostles were ' all ' afraid of Paul when Barnabas 
introduced him to them. 

In a certain sense Paul declares his Gospel to be 
another and yet ' not another ' or ' not a second.' The 
Gospel which Paul announced was certainly and essen- 
tially another than that which was preached by the 
twelve Apostles, if it can be proved that Paul has 
applied to Jesus the Essenic doctrine of the Angel- 
Messiah, on which the pre-Babylonian Scriptures and 
the first three Gospels observe a mysterious silence. 
From this it follows that Jesus cannot have approved 
of this doctrine. But if Jesus, who had chosen the 
Twelve, was the Angel-Messiah who had revealed him- 
self to Paul, this Apostle's Gospel could in a certain 
sense not be another, though a second, inasmuch as 
the author of both Gospels was asserted to be the same 
individual. Only the assumption that the Twelve did 
not believe in Jesus as the incarnate Angel, and the fact 
that Paul, like Stephen and Ananias, did so, seems to 
enable us to explain their fears of Paul when they first 
came in contact with him. Their fear could not have 
been caused by a doubt whether he really had become 
a follower of Stephen, had accepted the faith which 
once he destroyed. It will become more and more 
probable, if not certain, that the Apostles feared Paul 
because he had become an earnest and zealous convert 
of the new faith in an Angel-Messiah, which Stephen 
had perhaps first publicly proclaimed. 

It was among the Hellenists that Paul preached first, 
on his return from Antioch to Jerusalem, as if he 
expected to meet with more sympathy among them 
than among the Hebrews, and, we may assume, among 
the disciples of Jesus who looked to the Twelve as 
their guides. No more weight can be laid on the 
statement that the Hellenists wished to kill him and 

n 2 


that ' brethren ' (the Apostles ?) got him away, than on 
the statement that Paul went in and out with the 
Apostles who were all afraid of him, and that lie 
' freely ' or boldly declared the name of the Lord Jesus, 
that is, of the Angel-Messiah. Both may be attributed 
to the compromising tendency of the Acts. 

The Essenic element in the Church at Antioch, 
which was independent of that at Jerusalem, and to 
which Paul was introduced by Barnabas, is confirmed 
by the undeniably Essenic character of the Epistle of 
Barnabas, which the Fathers attribute unanimously to 
the Apostle of this name. We shall return to this 
subject. Another of the prophets of this Church was 
Maiiaen, who had been brought up with Herod, and 
whom we may safely identify with the Essenic prophet 
Menahem, who was at school with the tetrarch at 
Borne and predicted his future, according to Josephus. 
If Paul, another of the prophets of Antioch, can be 
proved from his own writings to have attributed to 
Jesus, like Stephen, and almost in the same words, the 
exclusively Essenic doctrine of the Angel-Messiah, then 
the Essenic element in the Antiochian Church will have 
been proved as an historical fact. 

The names of all Hellenistic deacons are of Greek 
origin. After Stephen the Acts name Philip, who was 
also called the Evangelist. He had prophesying 
daughters, and to him, as to Stephen, ' the Angel of 
the Lord ' appeared, that is, the Angel-Messiah of the 
Essenes and Therapeuts. There are some traits in the 
transmitted narrative about Philip which tend to con- 
firm the connection of some Hellenists with Therapeuts. 
Of those who had been scattered ' because ' of Stephen — 
because of the preacher on the Angel-Messiah, some had 
gone to Samaria and there preached 'the Word.' Here 
Philip met Simon, a born Samaritan, whose ancestors 
seem to have settled there from Citium in Cyprus, 
according to statements by Josephus. He was also 


called Magus — a name which may point to the Mao-i, 
and thus to the Maga or Maya, the spiritual power of 
Eastern tradition, especially of the Buddhists, with 
whose doctrines we have connected the Essenes. The 
Samaritans are by Josephus designated as Medo-Persian 
immigrants; and as such their priests, like those of the 
Medes, may have been called Magi, by others if not by 
the Samaritans. Simon the Samaritan might therefore 
as such have been called Magus. 

It must here suffice to make the following state- 
ments about Simon of Samaria, whom all the Fathers 
regard as the Father of heresy in the Christian Church, 
that is, of a false gnosis in the Apostolic age. He was 
educated at Alexandria, according to the Clementines ; 
the city of Sichem, also called Sychar, and later the 
city of Antioch, were the centres of his activity ; his 
disciples, like those of Jesus at Antioch, were first 
called by the name of Christians ; the disciples of 
Simon were baptized ; the Initiated among them had to 
keep certain doctrines secret ; their master taught them 
to believe in Jesus as ' the Word ' of all ages, as the 
Angel-Messiah and aboriginal type of Humanity, who 
came to the earth ' apparently as man, but not as man,' 
exactly as it is taught by the Epistle of Barnabas ; the 
Simonians distinguished a spiritual from a material 
world, and believed in an allegorical meaning of Scrip- 
ture ; Simon in his writings referred to John the 
Baptist or Essene and to Paul's Epistles ; he is reported 
to have had disputations with Peter in Eome, where a 
party favourable to him existed before his arrival, as 
was the case with Paul ; the Chrestus- or Christos-party 
among the Jews in this city, which apparently is men- 
tioned at exactly the same time when Simon is said to 
have been there, may be regarded as the party of 
Simon who called himself a Christian, which name ori- 
ginated in Antioch, the centre of his activity. 1 

1 The name Chrestus, given by Suetonius, is by Clement of Alexandria 


All these points connect Simon of Samaria with the 
Essenes. Simon is in the Clementine ' Becoomitions ' 
actually called a disciple of John the Baptist, and thus 
is directly connected with the Essenes. His reported 
education in Alexandria would therefore lead ns to 
connect him with the Therapeuts or universalist Essenes 
of that place, with which we have connected Stephen 
and Paul. If, nevertheless, the Christian Church sepa- 
rated Simon from Paul by a deep gulph, this can easily 
be explained by the not far-fetched supposition, that 
after the Acts had removed every difference between 
the doctrines of Paul and those of the Twelve, Simon 
necessarily was made the scapegoat, and the father of 
all false doctrines which denied the humanity of Jesus. 
It was necessary to do this, after the recognition by the 
Church of the Essenic-Paulinic doctrine about the Angel- 
Messiah, although Simon Magus had also taught that 
doctrine. It formed the very centre of the disputations 
between Simon and Peter at Borne, according to the 
Clementines ; and what Peter had openly combated, 
could not be suffered to appear as that which, like 
Simon, Paul had taught. This compromise was facili- 
tated, as we shall see, by Paul's considerate open 
acknowledgment of the human nature of Jesus, and it 
led to the union of the two parties among the disciples 
of Jesus, of the aboriginal or Jewish-Christian party, 
which had regarded Jesus as the anointed Man, and of 
the Gentile-Christian or Therapeut party, which recog- 
nised Jesus as the anointed Angel. 

Philip the deacon, though the Acts oppose him to 
Simon of Samaria, probably preached the Essenic doc- 
trine of the Angel-Messiah as Simon did, for Philip is in 
the Acts indirectly connected with the Angel-Messiah, 
because witli the Angel of the Lord. According to the 
Angel's direction, Philip was on his way to Gaza from 

given as Christos. It is within the range of possibility that Simon Niger, 
the prophet at Antioch, was Simon Magus. 


Samaria, probably going by Hebron. He had to pass 
the region to the west of the Dead Sea, where the 
Kenites or Eechabites, later the Essenes, had their 
settlements ; the country where John the Baptist was 
born, where he received the Divine call, and probably 
began to baptize. The servant of the Ethiopian Candace, 
or Queen, returning from Jerusalem, where he had been 
worshipping, was told by Philip, before being baptized, 
that the 53rd chapter in Isaiah refers to Jesus. This 
explanation had been made easier by the possibly Thera- 
peutic authors of the Septuagint, which text the eunuch 
was reading. A mystic interpretation had here been 
given to the passage which refers to the servant of God 
being taken away ' through tribulation and judgment.' 
Instead of this, it is said, that ' in his humiliation his 
judgment was taken away.' Again, whilst the Hebrew 
text says : ' Who of his contemporaries considers it, 
that he was taken away from the land of the living?' the 
Greek version has, ' Who shall declare his generation, 
for his life is taken from the earth ? ' Thus already here 
a hidden reference could be found to Melchizedec, whose 
generation the Scriptures do not transmit. This passage 
could be held to suggest that Jesus had neither father 
nor mother ; and that Jesus Christ, as Simon declared, 
was the Son of God, but not the son of David, as Philip's 
contemporary the Apostle Barnabas likewise taught in 
his Epistle. The sudden disappearance of Philip would 
confirm the Ethiopian in his mystic conceptions. 

The connection of Hellenists with Therapeuts can be 
confirmed by the fact that Paul, after his conversion to 
the faith of Stephen, like him, preached Jesus as the 
Angel-Messiah, whom in Israel only the Essenes ex- 
pected : a doctrine of which there is no trace in the first 
three Gospels, or in any Scriptures possibly composed 
before the deportation to Babylon, and therefore before 
the birth of Gautama-Buddha, the Angel-Messiah of 


The Person of Christ. 

The doctrinal system of Paul centres in his doctrine 
of Christ. The undoubtedly genuine Epistles of the 
Apostle prove, that he regarded Jesus as an incarnate 
Angel, as the Angel of the Lord who went before and 
followed the Israelites. Almost in the same words 
in which Stephen had applied to Jesus the doctrine 
of the Angel-Messiah, Paul refers to Jesus Christ as 
the spiritual Eock which followed the Israelites in the 
wilderness. In the account of the shipwreck recorded 
in the Acts, Paul describes that ' an Angel of God ' had 
stood by him in the night, ' whose I am and whom I 
serve.' If these words refer not to God, but to the. 
Angel, the latter would have been the same Angel who 
had appeared to him at the time of his conversion to 
the faith of Stephen, that is, the Angel who had fol- 
lowed the Israelites, the spiritual Eock, or Christ. 1 Since 
some of the Greek-speaking Jews, like Stephen, believed 
in Jesus as the Angel-Messiah whom the Essenes ex- 
pected, we should expect even on this ground only, that 
the Apostle who says he was to the Jews a Jew and to 
the Greeks a Greek — that the great Apostle of universal 
religion would aim at harmonising in his Epistles and 
addresses the diverging Messianic conceptions. 

There was no reason to doubt the human nature of 
Jesus Christ, at least not for anyone who could say, with 
Paul, that Jesus was ' made of the seed of David accord- 
ing to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of God with 
power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resur- 
rection from the dead.' This might have been said by 
any disciple, even by one who did not believe, as Paul 
did, in Jesus as an incarnate Angel. Although this is 
the only passage in Paul's Epistles where the human 
nature of Jesus Christ is clearly and directly acknow- 
ledged, yet other passages imply it. Paul had especial 

1 1 Cor. x. 4 ; Acts xxvii. 23 ; comp. Rom. i. 9. 


reasons to be conciliatory at Home, where the elders of 
the Jews regarded him as member of a sect ' everywhere 
spoken against.' 

It is more difficult to refer this sect to that of the 
Christians than to that of the Essenes. For, whilst the 
Christians at Jerusalem under James had not there been 
spoken against, since they had exchanged the Synagogue 
for the Temple, the Essenes were by all the Jews spoken 
against as dissenters, and their belief in an Angel- 
Messiah was rejected by every orthodox Jew. We have 
no right to assert that the Jews in Eome or anywhere 
could have designated Peter or any of the Apostles at 
Jerusalem as belonging to a sect ' everywhere spoken 
against ' 

Whether the sect in question was the Christian or 
the Essenian one, of ' this sect,' to which Paul belonged, 
there were members in Eome before Paul arrived there, 
for 'brethren' had gone to meet him at the Appian 
Forum. Signs are not absolutely wanting that these 
' brethren ' were Essenian Christians. According to the 
' Clementines,' Barnabas, whom we regard as a Levite 
who had become an Essene, taught in Rome and in 
Alexandria before the crucifixion of Jesus. As already 
stated, the genuine Epistle of Barnabas, though worked 
over, shows that he denied the human nature of Jesus, 
and called those who regarded him as son of David 
4 wicked Jews.' The ' Clementines,' probably composed 
in Rome and reaching back to the first century, testify 
to the existence of an Essenic party in Rome, with which 
we may connect the party which Simon had in that 
city. If this Essenic party in Rome, which Barnabas 
may be assumed to have addressed there, denied the 
human nature of Jesus, as Barnabas certainly did, Paul 
had special reasons for clearly stating, what he has done 
in no other Epistle than in that to the Romans, that 
Jesus is the son of David as well as the Son of God. 

Paul separated from Barnabas on the question of 


the admittance of uncircumcised Gentiles ; but another 
reason for his separating from him seems to have been, 
that Paul, opposing Barnabas and Simon of Samaria, 
insisted on the recognition of the human nature of Jesus, 
notwithstanding his Divinity. In the above-cited passage 
of his Roman Epistle, the Apostle distinguishes the 
fleshly from the spiritual birth of Jesus Christ in such a 
manner, that the doctrine of Peter about the man Jesus 
anointed with the Holy Ghost and with power could be 
well harmonised with it. It may be assumed that Paul 
by this Epistle laid a foundation for the ' spiritual gift,' 
that is, of peace in the Churches, which gift he wished 
to bring to this divided Church, founded by Peter 
according to tradition transmitted to us, and in which 
the Jewish-Christian element predominated. The har- 
monious co-operation of Peter and Paul in Kome, their 
common martyrdom in this city, are historical facts ; 
and it may be asserted that the diverging opinions of the 
Twelve and of Paul on the person of Christ lost their 
party character by Paul's open acknowledgment of the 
humanity of Jesus. 

Although in a single passage — assuming its correct 
transmission — Paul clearly insists on the human as well 
as on the implied angelic nature of Christ, yet his coming 
in the flesh is explained in a qualified sense, though not 
altogether drawn in question, by another passage in the 
same Epistle to the Eomans : ' For what the law could 
not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God 
sending his own Son in the likeness of (the) sinful flesh, 
and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.' Only in conse- 
quence of the sending of God's own Son (the Angel- 
Messiah), in the likeness of (the) sinful flesh, it became 
possible to men to fulfil the righteousness of the law, to 
such ' who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit.' 
It is here obviously pointed out, that since the fall of 
the first Adam humanity has either not possessed the 
Spirit of God, or possessed it without the possibility of 


obeying it, because of sin. The Apostle seems to distin- 
guish the sinful flesh from the not-sinful flesh. The 
Epistles of Paul attest, that he did not believe it possible 
for even the most perfect of men to walk after the 
Spirit, to be led by the Spirit of God, to become sons of 
God, before God's sending his own Son and with him 
the Spirit of Promise. Paul may therefore be under- 
stood to have said, that God sent his own Son, not ' in 
the sinful flesh,' but ' in the likeness of the sinful flesh,' 
that is, into a new kind of flesh, into such flesh as had 
been prepared for the Angel of God, so that the latter 
might keep his angelic nature after his assumption of a 
fleshy nature ' like ' that of men, ' yet without sin.' 1 

Christ and the Spirit of God. 

As the ' Name ' or Spirit of God is in the Angel of 
the Lord, so it is in Jesus, though, according to the 
flesh, he is the son of David. The flesh of Christ Jesus 
was by Paul held to be spiritualised flesh, as Tertullian 
says—' flesh with the Spirit of God.' Not flesh which 
wars against the spirit, not the flesh of fallen man, 
which had been un-spiritualised by the withdrawal of 
the Spirit of God in the time of the flood, not the flesh 
of ' children of wrath,' to which, the Jews ' even as 
others,' all men belonged, up to the time of the incar- 
nation of the Son of God, but the flesh of Christ Jesus 
was by Paul held to be such flesh as would be, and was, 
directed by the Spirit of God. Without assistance from 
heaven, without God's unspeakable gift of his Holy 
Spirit, which was brought down by the anointed Angel 
of God, man cannot overcome sin, he can only be saved 
by the grace of God's Spirit, which helps his infirmi- 
ties, and makes intercession for him. 2 

1 Rom. xii. 3, 4 ; comp. Tertull. Be Came Christi, 3 ; Ps. xl. 7 ; Hebr. x. 
5 ; iv. 15 ; ix. 28 ; where ' a body ' is inserted instead of ' ears.' 

2 Rom. viii. 26, 27, 34 ; comp. i. 4. 


The law could not bring the Spirit of God, and 
was c added because of transgression.' Its highest 
object was to be a schoolmaster, preparing for Christ. 
Not only till the law, also after it, ' there was sin in the 
world,' until ' faith came,' till the Angel of God had 
brought to earth the Holy Ghost, so that those who 
allow themselves to be led by the Spirit of God are 
children of God. Sin came by the disobedience of the 
first Adam, grace came by the obedience of the second 
Adam. Faith establishes the law, inasmuch as the 
letter that killeth is interpreted by the quickening or 
life-giving Spirit, because the ' shameful ' system of keep- 
ing back, which has existed since Moses, has been laid 
aside. Because of the withdrawing of God's Spirit, 
Adam and Eve hid themselves from ' the presence ' of 
God, his ' countenance ' shone no more upon them ; the 
Spirit of God did ' not always strive ' or remain with 
fallen man, he was ' flesh,' only flesh, flesh without the 
Spirit of God. Even Abraham could not be righteous, 
but he believed God, who promised the future blessing 
of mankind in Abraham's seed, the seed to whom the 
promise was made. 

The faith of Abraham was ' accounted to him for 
righteousness,' and ' faithful Abraham ' became the 
father of those, among Gentiles and Jews, who, ' re- 
ceived the spirit by the hearing of faith,' that is, ' the 
adoption of sons,' in consequence of which God sent 
' the Spirit of his Son' into their hearts, and redeemed 
their bodies. Abraham rejoiced to see the ' day ' when 
the Angel of God would bring back the Spirit to man- 
kind, would bring the faith which should ' afterwards 
be revealed,' after the Mosaic law, which has ' nothing 
to do with faith.' The promised faith and the promised 
Spirit of God came by the Angel-Messiah, the second 
Adam, who was a ' quickening spirit.' Henceforth, man 
has become ' spiritual,' he is ' a new creature,' he belongs 
to a new generation of men, born under direct celestial 


influences, he stands in a new relation to God through 
the mediation of an anointed Angel. 

Paul seems to have held that, even after the fall of 
man, he was possessed of reason and will, but not of 
conscience. What was to become life and light in man 
had first to be manifested in the likeness of sinful, be- 
cause un-spiritualised flesh, by the ' man from heaven,' 
by the incarnation of the Word from the beginning, the 
Angel of God in whom that life was. His glory, as of 
the only one Son of the Father, full of grace and truth, 
had first to be seen by man in ' the face of Christ,' before 
the glorified Son, raised by God's right hand, could 
receive the promise of the Father for mankind, the 
Spirit to be poured on all flesh. That Divine Spirit was 
intended to have been restored by the Angel of God 
who appeared to Moses, and whom Paul identifies with 
Christ Jesus, as Stephen had done before him. Already 
then the incarnation of the Angel-Messiah might have 
taken place. But Israel would not obey Moses, and 
resisted the Holy Ghost, as it did when Stephen, ' full 
of the Holy Ghost,' revealed Jesus as the Angel-Messiah. 
Even John the Baptist or Essene regarded as future 
the coming into the world of that true light which 
lighteth all men. The baptism with the Holy Ghost or 
with fire, typified by water baptism, was to be introduced 
by the Angel of God, according to John's expectation. 
The disciples of John had not even heard that there is 
a Holy Ghost. God had not yet ' introduced his first- 
born into the world.' 

Nevertheless, Paul refers to the passage in the 
Mosaic Scriptures about the Word which is in man's 
heart that he may do it. The Apostle states that ' faith,' 
that is, the faith which should be revealed after the law 
on Sinai in the fulness of time, ' cometh by hearing, 
and hearing by the word of God,' that is, as we shall 
see, by Christ, the spiritual Bock, by the Angel which 
followed the Israelites, by the Angel-Messiah. Paul is 


far from admitting that the Word is an innate faculty or 
spiritual power by which, man willing, the sinfulness of 
the flesh can be overcome, that the Word or Spirit of 
God is a soul-saving power which in measure man has 
possessed in all ages, and for the abiding presence of 
which in his soul David prayed. 

The passage in question, the only one in which Paul 
calls Christ the Word of God, is by him explained to be 
a prophecy referring to the coming of Christ ' as the 
end of the law.' The ' Word ' of which Moses said that 
it need not be brought from heaven nor beyond the sea, 
but which was already then in the Israelites that they 
might to do it, that Word Paul implies to have been 
Christ. This Word of God, or Christ, is identical with 
the Angel-Messiah, or spiritual Eock which followed 
the Israelites. Christ, the Word of God, having come 
down ' from heaven ' need not be ' brought down,' and 
after his resurrection he need not be ' brought up 
(again) from the dead.' When Moses uttered those 
words, he spoke in the spirit about ' the word of faith ' 
which Paul preached. The word of which Moses said 
that it was then in the ' mouth ' of the Israelite, Paul 
explains to be the confession of ' the Lord Jesus ' with 
the mouth ; again, the word of which Moses said that 
it was then in the ' heart ' of the Israelite, and that it 
depended on him whether he followed it and lived, or 
did it not and died, this word Paul explains as the belief 
in the heart, that God has ' raised Jesus from the dead.' 
This new belief the Apostle designates as the condi- 
tion of salvation. 1 A real masterpiece of allegorical 
interpretation of Scripture in the Essenic spirit, if not 
derived from Essenic tradition, as our scheme seems to 

If Israel's fathers ' always resisted the Holy Ghost,' 
as Stephen declared, and if the Holy Ghost had been 
withdrawn after the fall, as Paul implies, and as the 

1 Horn. x. 4-21 ; Dcut. xxx. 11-20. 


narrative about the Flood confirms, then the holiest 
Israelite could only have resisted an innate germ of 
good, a moral sensitiveness which, without preparing 
him for spiritual influences from above, might have 
prevented his yielding to the germ of evil. What 
Moses says about the Word in the heart of man, can 
only be referred to an inborn power of good. In all 
Scriptures attributed to him there is nothing which 
points to the future coining of the Holy Ghost, or a 
future life. The Israelite was placed by Moses under 
the stern and ritualistic discipline of the written law, 
which took no cognisance of conscience. For the law 
treats man as if he had no conscience ; and the object of 
the lawgiver seems to have been the formation of a con- 
science by moral precepts, and by imposing and sugges- 
tive ceremonies. But Paul attributes to Moses the in- 
tention, in the passage above quoted, to point to Jesus 
as by God raised from the dead, and thus determined to 
be the Son of God, or the Angel-Messiah, ' according to 
the spirit of holiness.' The Apostle regards Jesus as 
the restorer of the Holy Ghost, and of the state of 
things which existed in Paradise. 

Between the time of the first and the manifestation of 
the second Adam man could not be saved. By the first 
or terrestrial ' man ' came death, by the second or celes- 
tial ' Man ' the resurrection of the dead. Thus Paul has 
paved the way for asserting the absolute necessity of a 
supernatural Messiah, an Angel-Messiah, as the Saviour 
of mankind. The Messiah, who was to spiritualise flesh 
and blood and to save it from corruption, Christ Jesus, 
is the incarnate Word or Angel of the Lord who was with 
Moses and the fathers in the wilderness, ' the spiritual 
Eock which followed the Israelites.' 

We saw, that already ancient Eabbinical tradition 
calls the Angel of God the Eock. This figurative language 
here used refers to the passages in Exodus, where it is said 
that * the Angel of God, which went before the camp of 


Israel, removed and went behind them ; and the pillar of 
the cloud went from before their face, and stood behind 
them, ... it gave light by night to them.' ' Behold, I 
send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to 
bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Be- 
ware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not ; for 
he will not pardon your transgressions ; for my Name is 
in him.' : What is said of the fiery pillar is said of the 
•Angel who followed Israel. The Angel is described as 
the conveyancer of God's ' Name,' which the Aaro.nites 
were ordered to ' put upon ' the children of Israel by 
pronouncing the blessing. ' Thus ' God would ' bless 
them.' In this and in similar passages of the Old and 
New Testaments the ' Name ' means Spirit or Word. 
The symbol of the Spirit or Word was fire, which was oh 
all altars where God recorded his Name and blessed 
Israel. For this reason the fiery serpent which Moses 
made of brass 2 is designated as the Word of God in the 
Book of Wisdom, where the Word of God is also com- 
pared with lightning, to which the original figurative 
meaning of the serpent as fire from heaven referred. 
The Angel in whom is the Name of God is therefore 
designated as the conveyancer of the Spirit or Word of 
God, and for this reason the ministers of God are con- 
nected with or symbolised by flaming fire. 

We saw that, according to the Targum, it was the 
Memra or Word which followed the Israelites, from 
which it follows that, according to Jewish pre-Christian 
(Essenic ?) tradition, the Angel of God was the Word of 
God. He was called ' the Eock of the Church of Zion.' 

Paul has designated the Angel-Messiah as the con- 
veyancer of the Spirit of God. This interpretation is in 
harmony with the cardinal point of Paul's doctrine 
about the Spirit of God, asserted to have been absent 
from mankind after the fall of the first and before the 

1 Ex. adv. 10, 20 ; xxiii. 20, 21 ; xx. 24; Num. vi. 27. 

2 In Hebrew, Nacliash means ' brass ' as well as 'serpent.' 


coming of the second Adam from heaven. But why- 
does Paul call the Angel or Word of God, that is, Christ, 
the spiritual Bock, as Targumists or authorised inter- 
preters of Holy Writ had probably done before him ? 

According to Philo, the Word of God was figura- 
tively represented by the sun, which Messianic symbol 
took the place of the fire-symbol, and was represented 
by the central lamp of the Mosaic candlestick. In the 
midst of the same a vision in the Apocalypse of John 
describes the Word of God or Christ ; and we have 
connected, in another place, this symbolism of John 
and Philo with visions in the Books of Ezekiel and of 
Zechariah, as well as these with the Agni-sacrifice in 
the Kig-Veda. The seven lamps of the candlestick, we 
are told, referred to sun, moon, and five planets, and 
thus we may connect them with the seven pillars of the 
House or Church of the Wisdom of God, that is, of 
Christ, who is by this symbolism identified with the 
Word or Wisdom of God. The seven pillars of the 
House of Wisdom were ' hewn out ' from the rock, as 
Israel was hewn from its great ancestors Abraham and 
Sarah, who are by Isaiah compared to a rock. 1 But the 
rock from which mankind has been hewn is the great 
celestial progenitor, the aboriginal type of humanity, 
the Angel of the Lord, the Angel-Messiah, the Lord 
Jesus Christ, ' by ' whom all men are, according to 
Paulinic doctrine. 

We now understand why Paul attributes the creation 
of the world to Jesus Christ as the Word of God. Also 
in the Epistle to the Hebrews it is said that the worlds 
were framed by the Word of God. Paul writes : ' For 
though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven 
or in earth (as there be gods many and lords many), 
but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom 
are all things, and we in him, and one Lord Jesus 

1 Das Symbol des Kreuzes bei alien Xationen, 112-114; Fro v. ix. 1; 
Is. li. 1. 


Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.' Ac- 
cording to Paul's gospel it was by Christ's will and 
purpose, by his grace, that ' though he was rich ' yet 
for our sakes ' he was (became) poor,' that, through his 
poverty we might be rich. By coming from heaven to 
earth, in the likeness of sinful flesh, Christ Jesus gave 
up the angelic and ' divine form ' or ' form of God,' and 
took upon him the form of a servant. 1 

Paul has accepted, developed, applied, and promul- 
gated the Essenic doctrine of the Angel-Messiah, as 
bringer of the Spirit of God to mankind. It cannot 
be proved, or even rendered probable, that an Angel- 
Messiah, and he as the bringer of the Holy Ghost, 
was expected by any body of Israelites, except by the 
Essenes and Therapeuts. With the latter we connected 
some of the Eabbis, and those Targumists whose doctrines 
have been transmitted to us by the Targumim. These 
Essenic doctrines were certainly proclaimed by Stephen, 
the first of the deacons among the Hellenists, or Greek- 
speaking Jews, some of whom seem to have belonged 
to the Therapeuts of Alexandria. If Stephen, the first 
provable preacher of Jesus as the Angel-Messiah, was 
a Therapeut, we understand why Paul, having gone 
over to his faith, promulgated this doctrine almost in 
the very words of Stephen, and why the Essenes of 
Judasa, who excluded all Gentiles, regarded Paul as 
their enemy, after that he represented the doctrines of 
the universalist Essenes of Egypt, or of the Thera- 

Though Jesus had acknowledged the principle of 
universality, the twelve Apostles did not at once openly 
recognise it. But the most essential difference between 
the preaching of Jesus and of his Apostles on one side, 
and the gospel of Paul on the other, centred in that of 
the Angel-Messiah, which Jesus had not acknowledged 

1 Hehr.xi. 3; 1 Cor. viii. 5, ; comp. Ps. xxxiii. 6 ; 2 Oor. viii. 9; 
Phil. ii. 6. 


or applied to himself. If the Apostles at Jerusalem had 
preached the doctrine of the Angel-Messiah, the first 
three Gospels would show that Jesus did reveal himself 
as such. The silence of the first Evangelists about this 
new Messianic doctrine can no longer be explained by 
the supposition that this doctrine belonged to a secret 
doctrine, forbidden by the Jewish authorities. For the 
Eastern doctrine of the Angel-Messiah, which had in 
the last instance been applied to Gautama-Buddha, 
must have belonged to the secret doctrine of the 
Essenes, since this doctrine cannot possibly be separated 
from other doctrines and rites which the Essenes have 
provably derived from the East. If the doctrine of the 
Angel-Messiah has by the Essenes first been applied to 
Jesus, and not till after his resurrection on ; the third 
day according to the Scriptures,' as we shall try to 
prove, then it will be explained why Paul derives from 
Christ's resurrection the testimony for his being the Son 
of God, and therefore for his revelation as the spiritual 
Bock or Angel of God. It looks as if, until his resur- 
rection, this doctrine of the Angel-Messiah had not 
been applied to Christ Jesus. 

The probable connection of Stephen, and therefore 
of Paul, with the Essenes, has been confirmed by the 
equally probable connection of Ananias and others with 
the Essenes; yet this new standpoint for the critical 
examination of Paul and of his doctrine requires fur- 
ther support. In the first place, we shall trace back to 
an Essenian source the doctrine of Christ's resurrection 
on the third day according to the Scriptures, as taught 
by Paul, and also his doctrine oh the atonement ; and we 
shall then consider whether the ' high probability ' ex- 
pressed by Eusebius can be sufficiently established, that 
the Scriptures of the Therapeutic order have been used 
in the composition of Pauline Epistles, especially of the 
Epistle to the Hebrews, and that they have also been 
utilised for the composition of the Gospels transmitted 

o 2 


to us. Although this statement of the church -historian 
cannot be asserted to have been a pure invention, yet 
hitherto nothing has been brought forward in support 
of it. If the Bishop's opinion can be substantiated, our 
argument on the Essenic source of Pauline doctrines 
will stand on firm ground. 

Tlie Resurrection of Christ. 

In the Old Testament, if literally interpreted, there 
is no trace either of an expected Angel-Messiah, nor of 
a Messiah who should visibly rise from the dead and 
ascend to heaven. We saw that the Essenes, to whom 
the disciples of John belonged, expected an Angel as 
Messiah, and that they tried to connect their new Mes- 
sianic and other doctrines with those of Moses, by a 
figurative interpretation of the Scriptures attributed to 
him. Among the Essenic Scriptures, which, according 
to Eusebius, have been used by the Evangelists and by 
Paul, there probably were such which referred to the 
resurrection of the Angel-Messiah whom they expected. 
Many disciples of John or Essenes are in the fourth 
Gospel recorded to have believed in Jesus, possibly as the 
Angel-Messiah, even before his death, although John 
seems to have died without such belief, according to the 
first three Gospels. When Paul wrote to the Corinthians 
that Jesus rose ' the third day according to the Scrip-, r 
tures,' none of the Gospels transmitted to us existed. 
The Apostle, therefore, must have referred to the Mosaic 
Scriptures, at least according to their allegorical inter- 
pretation. Such figurative interpretation of Scripture 
can only be proved to have existed among Essenes. 
From this it already results, that the most ancient 
historical testimony of Christ's resurrection stands in 
connection with the Essenic interpretation of Scripture. 
It can be proved that Paul referred to Moses as his 
original authority for his belief in the divinely caused 

'IDLE TALES.' 197 

resurrection of Christ. We will first show, that the 
tradition about this reported event, which was later re- 
corded in our Gospels, is so full of contradictions, that 
it cannot possibly have been the source for that which 
Paul believed. 

It is well known, that in the Gospel after Mark — the 
end of which, from the 8th verse of the last chapter, 
has been added later — no appearances of the risen Jesus 
are recorded. Three women found an open and empty 
grave, and they saw on the right side a young man, 
clothed in a white garment, who announced to them 
the resurrection of the crucified Jesus, and commis- 
sioned them to tell his disciples and Peter that they 
should go to Galilee, where they would see him. But 
trembling and amazement had possession of them, and 
they said nothing to any man. According to the 
account in Matthew, instead of a young man it is an 
Angel of the Lord who made the same announcement 
to the women, and gave them the same command, after 
that, preceded by an earthquake, he had descended 
from heaven and rolled back the stone from the door 
and sat upon it. The women departed quickly to bring 
the disciples word ; and on the way Jesus met them, 
whom they held by the feet and worshipped. This 
was also done by the eleven disciples when they saw 
him on the mountain in Galilee, where Jesus had 
appointed them ; but some doubted. 

According to Luke the glad tidings were made 
known to the women at the grave by two men in 
shining garments, who reminded them how Jesus had 
foretold his crucifixion and resurrection on the third 
day. The words of the women seemed to the eleven 
and all the rest as ' idle tales,' and they believed them 
not. Nothing is said of their going to Galilee ; and 
in direct opposition to this command, as recorded by 
Mark and Matthew, it is recorded in the Acts, that the 
risen Messiah had commanded the Apostles whom he 


had chosen, that they should not depart from Jeru- 
salem, but wait for the promise of the Father, about 
which he had spoken to them. 'Not many days 
hence,' that is, after the forty days, of which the 
Gospels say nothing, they should be ' baptized with the 
Holy Ghost.' In accordance with this new version 
Luke relates how the risen Lord appeared at different 
times in or near Jerusalem. This Evangelist mentions 
in one passage as the day of the Messiah's ascension 
the third day, in another the fortieth day after the 

In the place of the young man in Mark, of the 
Angel in Matthew, and of the two men in Luke, the 
fourth Evangelist mentions two angels in white, sitting 
the one at the head and the other at the feet where the 
body of Jesus had lain. Mary Magdalene having com- 
municated to them the cause of her weeping. — her not 
knowing to what place men had removed her Lord, 
on her turning round saw Jesus standing, and knew not 
that it was Jesus, supposing him to be the gardener* 
But on hearing Jesus call her Mary, she turned herself* 
and said unto him, Eabboni, which is to say Master* 
Thereupon the risen Jesus appeared three times to the 

The fourth and the third Gospels contain the 
valuable information that the twelve Apostles had not 
looked forward to a visible resurrection of Jesus from 
the dead. Luke records that the eleven and the rest 
regarded as ' idle tales ' what the women reported to 
have seen at the grave of Jesus, and therefore did not 
believe them. The fourth Evangelist relates that Peter 
and John were not convinced by Mary Magdalene, 
coming from the open and empty grave, and that only 
after having run to the grave, and seen the linen clothes 
lying about, John did then see and believe, but ' as yet 
they knew not the Scriptures that lie must rise again 
from the dead,' The fact here recorded attests that Jesus 


had not predicted his resurrection ; and it explains the 
other fact, attested by all four Gospels, that in the early 
morning in question none of the Apostles had gone to 
the grave of Jesus, which they must have done had they 
expected his bodily resurrection. 

The first Apostle who is reported to have believed 
in the resurrection of Jesus did not connect at once with 
any passage in the Scriptures the unexpected occur- 
rence. Even John had to learn before he could believe, 
if he ever did, what Paul believed a few years later, that, 

* according to the Scriptures,' Jesus had risen from the 
dead on ' the third day.' Can John, or any other of the 
twelve Apostles, ever have believed this ? 

Since the Scriptures of the Old Testament, even 
supposing that they refer to the death of the Messiah, 
do not fix the day of the year in which it should take 
place, and since these Scriptures certainly do not refer 
to the day of his resurrection, Paul's belief presumes that 
two Mosaic institutions, typically interpreted, could be 
referred relatively to the former and to the latter, and 
that the days connected with these types were sepa- 
rated from each other by one day. These two typical 
institutions can have been no other than the slaying of 
the Paschal lamb on the 14th Nisan, and the presenta- 
tion of the firstling-sheaf or Paschal omer on the 16th 
Nisan. If it is only according to the narrative in the 
fourth Gospel that Jesus is implied to have been cruci- 
fied on the 14th, and to have risen on the 16th Nisan. 
this tradition therein recorded harmonised with the 
solemn statement made by Paul to the Corinthians : 

* For I delivered unto you first of all, what I also (among 
others) received,' that is, that Jesus died, was buried, 
and rose again 'the third day according to the Scrip- 

On the above assumption it would further follow 
that the tradition about the resurrection of Jesus on the 
third day after his death, as recorded in the Gospel 


after John, was unknown to Peter and John in the 
morning of the 16th Nisan, when they as yet knew not 
the Scriptures that Christ must rise again from the 
dead. Finally, if in no other Gospel than in the fourth 
the types of the Paschal lamb and of the Paschal 
oiner are represented as having received their anti- 
types, the one type by the death of Jesus on the 14th, 
and the other by his resurrection on the 16th Nisan, it 
follows conclusively either that the composers of the 
first three Gospels erred when they narrated the cruci- 
fixion of Jesus to have taken place on the loth Nisan, 
or that the tradition about the date of this event, as 
recorded in the fourth Gospel, is not historical. It can 
be rendered probable that this tradition in the fourth 
Gospel was invented, sooner or later , for the purpose of 
letting it appear that Jesus was the antitype of the 
Paschal lamb and of the Paschal omer, and that he rose 
the third day according to the Scriptures, as Paul de- 
clared. From whence can this tradition have come, 
which is testified by Paul, and in the fourth 
Gospel ? 

It is quite certain that, according to the first three 
Evangelists, Jesus ate the Paschal lamb with his dis- 
ciples on the 14th Nisan, before lie suffered on the 15th 
Nisan ; and it is impossible to assume that Matthew, 
Luke, and Mark followed an erroneous tradition as to 
these dates. These Evangelists knew that Jesus was 
crucified on the 15th Nisan, the day after the slaying 
and eating of the Paschal lamb. From this it follows 
that if they believed in the resurrection of Jesus on 
the third day, that day must have been the 17th Nisan. 
If, however, we assume that Matthew, Mark and Luke 
could have been under an error on this point, and that 
the fourth Evangelist is alone right when he clearly 
implies that the crucifixion took place already on the 
14th Nisan, it would follow with equal force that if 
Jesus rose on the third day, he did so, not on the 17th 


but on the 16th Nisan. The different statements about 
the day of the crucifixion must have led to different 
statements with regard to the day of the resurrection, 
if the latter event had to be accomplished on the third 
day after the former. Yet, in the first three Gospels, 
the resurrection of Jesus is as clearly as in the fourth 
Gospel described to have taken place on the first day of 
the week as it began to dawn. 

If it can be shown that, according to the fourth Gos- 
pel, the day of the resurrection was the third day after the 
slaying of the Paschal lamb, and was also the third 
day after the death of Jesus, then it will be proved that the 
resurrection is in all four Gospels implied to have taken 
place on the 16th Nisan, and in the very same hours of 
early morning when the firstling-sheaf or Paschal omer 
was presented in the Temple. From this it will follow 
with mathematical certainty, that according to the first 
three Gospels Jesus rose on the second day after his 
death, and that according to the fourth Gospel he rose, 
as Paul declared, ' on the third day according to the 
Scriptures.' Now, the first day of the week, the Sun- 
day of the Christians, is in all the Gospels mentioned as 
the day of the resurrection of Jesus, whilst the cruci- 
fixion took place according to the fourth Gospel one day 
earlier than according to the first three. It follows, that 
according to the latter Jesus was buried on the day pre- 
vious to his resurrection, that is on the Sabbath, but ac- 
cording to the fourth Gospel on the Friday, so that the 
resurrection took place on the third day, thus corre- 
sponding with the presentation of the first barley-meal, 
which ' according to the Scriptures ' had to take place 
the third day after the slaying of the Paschal lamb. 

Does the fourth Gospel imply that Jesus died on the 
14th Nisan contemporaneously with the slaying of the 
Paschal lamb, and that he rose on the 16th Nisan con- 
temporaneously with the presentation of the Paschal 
omer ? 


At the outset it may be observed that unless the day 
of the resurrection of Jesus was the 16th Nisan, that is 
the third day after the slaying of the lamb, the Old 
Testament would contain no possible type, and the New 
Testament no antitype, to justify Paul's declaration that 
Jesus rose on the third day ' according to the Scriptures.' 
If Jesus by his resurrection fulfilled the type of the 
Paschal omer on the 16th Nisan, he must have fulfilled 
by his death on the 14th Nisan the type of the Paschal 
lamb. Only according to the fourth Gospel, as we shall 
see, have these two Mosaic types been fulfilled by Jesus, 
and here only is he designated as the Lamb of God, 
again in harmony with Paul's preaching. It is only in 
the Gospel after John that the Baptist is recorded to 
have pointed to him as ' the Lamb of God which taketh 
away the sin of the world ' ; it is only here that Jesus is 
recorded to have spoken of the eating of his flesh and 
the drinking of his blood ; and finally it is here only that 
Jesus is not recorded to have eaten the Paschal lamb 
with his disciples on the day before his crucifixion. 
Jesus could not have done this if the lamb was not yet 
slain on that day, and if the day after his last supper 
was the 14th Nisan, when contemporaneously with the 
slaying, and as antitype of the lamb, he was to be cruci- 

These peculiarities in the fourth Gospel would show, 
even if taken by themselves, that according to the 
fourth Gospel Jesus was the antitype of the Paschal 
lamb, and in this sense the Lamb of God. But other 
statements in the same Gospel confirm the assertion that, 
according to the same, Jesus died on the 14th Nisan, 
contemporaneously with the slaying of the lamb. The 
anointing of Jesus before his death is here related to 
have taken place ' six days ' before the Passover, and 
yet it is implied that the day of anointing was the 10th 
Nisan, the same day when the Paschal lamb had to be 
set apart. For the Initiated would understand, that the 


sixth day before the Passover, when Jesus was anointed 
with oil unto the day of his burying, pointed to the day 
when the Paschal lamb was slain, to the 14th Nisan, 
when according to the fourth Gospel, as we shall see, 
the burial of Jesus took place, of him who was pro- 
claimed as the Paschal Lamb of the new confession. 

The 10th Nisan began in the evening of the 9th, 
and the 14th lasted until the morning of the 15th, so 
that although only four days were required between the 
setting apart and the slaying of the Paschal lamb, six 
days could be reckoned between these events. 

Again, the omission of the institution of the Lord's 
Supper in the fourth Gospel is at once explained if in 
that record Jesus was to be designated as the antitype 
of the Paschal lamb. It is not necessary to assume an 
unaccountable ' incompleteness in S. John's narrative ' 
with regard to a subject on which we are led ' to 
expect great fulness of detail,' by the circumstantiality 
with which the Paschal account in the fourth Gospel 
begins. 1 If it was one of the chief objects of this 
Gospel to establish, at least by implication, the new 
symbolism and doctrine about the Messianic Paschal 
Lamb, then no notice could be taken, in this Scripture, 
of an institution which, in the first three Gospels, is 
clearly stated to have been ordained after the slaying 
and the eating of the Paschal lamb. 

Thus far we have advanced the following arguments, 
tending to establish the fact that in the fourth Gospel 
the date of the crucifixion is implied to have been the 
14th Nisan, not the 15th, as in the other Gospels. 2 

1 Dr. Edersheim, The Temple, its Ministry and Set-vices at the time of 
Jesus Christ, published by the Religious Tract Society, 1874. 

2 Canon Farrer admits the discrepancy between the first three Gospels 
and the fourth Gospel about the day of the death of Jesus, and considers the 
account in the fourth Gospel as the historical one. Dr. Edersheim tries to 
show that according to all four Gospels the crucifixion took place on the loth 
Nisan. He ' tenaciously holds ' the doctrine of ' the plenary inspiration ' of 
the Bible. 


The Gospel in which alone Jesus is called the Lamb of 
God must connect his death with the slaying of the 
Paschal lamb on the 14th Nisan, in order to support 
the new Messianic attribute by the fulfilment of a type 
from the Old Testament. Again, in this Gospel the 
day of anointing can be explained so as to refer to the 
14th Nisan as the day of the crucifixion. Finally, if 
Jesus instituted a new rite on the day before he suf- 
fered, that rite could not by him have been connected 
with his eating of the Paschal lamb with the disciples, 
as attested by the first three Gospels, if on the following 
day he was to be crucified, contemporaneously with the 
slaying of the Paschal lamb, as the fourth Gospel 

To these three indirect proofs of the above assertion, 
a direct proof has to be added. It is stated in the 
fourth Gospel that after the supper, when Judas had 
betrayed Jesus, the Jews ' went not into the judgment 
hall, lest they should be defiled, but that they might 
eat the Passover.' According to this statement, the 
supper and the betrayal had taken place on the 13th, 
not on the 14th Nisan, on which day the Passover, that 
is, the Paschal lamb, was eaten, and had been eaten 
by Jesus with his disciples, if the first three Evangelists 
can be trusted. But according to the fourth Gospel, 
on the day after the supper and betrayal Jesus was to 
be crucified contemporaneously with the slaying of the 
Paschal lamb. 

Since all Evangelists by direct, and Paul by indirect 
statements, explain the eating of the Passover as the 
eating of the Paschal lamb, no notice need be taken of 
the attempt to prove that exceptionally in this passage 
of the fourth Gospel, the eating of the Passover is not 
to be referred to the lamb, but to the eating of the 
chagiga of unleavened bread with bitter herbs. The 
same was eaten for the first time after the lamb on the 
14th Nisan, but it was also eaten on the 15th Nisan, on 


which day Levitical purity was likewise required for 
so doing. 1 

We are now in a position to assert, that only ac- 
cording to statements made by Paul and in the fourth 
Gospel, Jesus rose on the third day after his death 
« according to the Scriptures.' We repeat the question 
Ave have raised : Whence can this tradition have come? 

Paul writes to the Corinthians, to whom he had 
first communicated this tradition, that ' he also ' had 
received it, therefore as others had done before him. 
Who can these have been ? Certainly not the Apostles, 
of whom not one expected anything so extraordinary 
after the burial of Jesus as a visible and corporeal 
resurrection of the same. The Apostles had not con- 
nected the expected resuscitation of the dead on the 
third day, already mentioned in the Zendavesta, with 
the offering of the barley-meal on the third day after 
the slaying of the Paschal lamb, which Moses had 
ordered. Again, Jesus had not been crucified con- 
temporaneously with the lamb on the 14th, instead of 
the,15th Nisan. Otherwise the idea might have sug- 
gested itself to the Apostles, that the ceremonials 
ordered by the law for the 14th and the 16th Nisan, 
according to God's eternal purpose, would be anti- 
typically fulfilled by the death and resurrection of 
Jesus. After the crucifixion the Apostles might have 
looked forward with a holy expectation to the 16th 
Nisan, if this day had been the third instead of the 
second after his death. Since we must regard this 
reckoning as correct, it is absolutely clear that those 
passages in the first three Gospels, according to which 
Jesus is said to have predicted or confirmed his resur- 
rection on the third day, are unhistorical, and have 
been inserted for the purpose of misleading the readers. 2 

1 Wieseler, followed by Dr. Edersheim, I. c. 

2 Matt. xvi. 21 ; xvii. 22, 23 ; xx. 17 ; Mark viii. 31 ; ix. 30, 31 ; x. 34; 
Luke ix. 22, comp. 45 ; xviii. 33 ; xxiv. 7, 21, 44. 


Among these statements, the most important are 
contained in the narrative of the disciples of Emmaus, 
who ' on the first day in the week,' thus on the 16th 
Nisan, as we know from the fourth Gospel, are said to 
have believed this was * the third day ' after the cruci- 
fixion. Luke cannot have inserted this narrative, since 
he knew, as his Gospel testifies, that this day was the 
second after the crucifixion. For the same reason, the 
two disciples on their return to Jerusalem cannot have 
convinced the assembled eleven, that He who had been 
crucified on the day previous to the 16th Nisan was 
risen on the 16th Nisan, as on the third day after his 
crucifixion. The testified apparition of the risen Jesus 
in their midst could not turn the second day into the 
third. Thus even the possibility falls to the ground, 
that Jesus, on his appearing to the eleven and the 
disciples of Emmaus, could have reminded them of the 
words which he had spoken to them whilst he was yet 
with them, ' that all things must be fulfilled which were 
written in the law of Moses, in the Prophets, and in the 
Psalms, concerning him, saying unto them : Thus it is 
written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer and to rise 
from the dead the third day.' 

This narrative cannot be accepted as a proof that 
the day of the reported apparition near Emmaus, to 
which Paul does not refer in his enumeration of the 
apparitions of Jesus after death, was ' the third day ' after 
his crucifixion. Yet the account shows that those who 
inserted it at the end of the Gospel after Luke regarded 
it as an introduction to the narrative published or to 
be published in the fourth Gospel. They claimed the 
sanction of Jesus, expressed before and after his cruci- 
fixion, for the typical reference of the slaying of the 
Paschal lamb on the 14th, and of the offering of the 
omer on the 16th Nisan, respectively, to his death and 
resurrection, as the Messiah or Christ foretold by the 
Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, This intentionally 


invented narrative was to confirm the fourth Gospel 
and to rectify the first three Gospels. Accordingly, the 
twelve Apostles ought to have understood the Scriptures 
and known that Jesus must rise from the dead. They 
ought to have watched at the sepulchre ' in the end of 
the Sabbath as it began to dawn toward the first day of 
the week.' This their unaccountable ignorance is ex- 
plained by one of the later inserted passages in Luke, in 
which we are told that the disciples ' understood not 
this saying, and it was hid from them, that they per- 
ceived it not ' ; that is, the saying of Jesus, about the 
Son of Man being betrayed into the hands of men, 
which is said to have been by Jesus connected with the 
prophecy of his rising on ' the third day.' 1 

It follows from this, that neither before or at any 
time after the 16th Nisan any one of the twelve 
Apostles can have believed in the resurrection of Jesus 
c the third day according to the Scriptures.' For the 
day on which the Apostles, called by women to the 
sepulchre, are stated to have seen and believed what 
they did not expect, was not the third day after the 
burial, but the second. The Twelve may have believed 
in the resurrection of Jesus on the second day, as such 
is reported in the first three Gospels, but they can never 
have believed that this occurred ' according to the 
Scriptures,' in which not a single passage, however figu- 
ratively interpreted, can be made to point to Messiah's 
resurrection on the day after his death. Thus it is 
proved by evidence drawn from the Old and the New Tes- 
tament, that the twelve Apostles did not belong to those, 
of whom Paul clearly implies, that they had before 
him received this tradition about the resurrection of 
Christ on ' the third day according to the Scriptures.' 

In order to answer the question, who these can 
have been, who ' also,' like Paul, had received this tra- 
dition, unknown to the twelve Apostles, we are led to 

1 Luke ix. 45, comp. 22. 


surmise that they may have been Essenes, who alone 
among the Jews recognised a figurative interpretation 
of Scripture, such as is demanded by the Paulinic doc- 
trine of the resurrection on ' the third day according 
to the Scriptures.' 

We pointed out, that the forerunner of the Messiah 
expected by the Essenes would be Elijah the tishbite, 
or stranger, the chariot or ' rechab ' of Israel, probably 
one of the Eechabites, with whom we have connected 
the Essenes. 1 This Messiah, who was to come in the 
spirit of Elijah, was expected to bring about the general 
resurrection from the dead. The resurrection of departed 
man was connected by Oriental tradition with the third 
day after his death. 2 The Essene, who was well 
acquainted with Oriental tradition, might therefore 
expect, that the Messiah, whether an incarnate Angel 
or not, as an introduction and announcement of the 
general resurrection, would rise on the third day after 
his death as firstling or ' firstfruit of them that sleep.' 
Sooner or later, this expectation would begin to take 
root among the Essenes. At all events, after that Jesus 
had died at the time of the Passover, the idea must 
have suggested itself, to connect the three days between 
the slaying of the lamb and the offering of the flour 
from the first ripened corn, with the three days which 
might possibly have elapsed between the death and the 
resurrection of Jesus as the Messiah. The crucifixion 
had been accomplished in such a hurried manner that to 
many, especially to the Essenes, who chiefly lived in the 
country, it may have been doubtful, whether Jesus had 
died on the 15th or on the 14th Nisam Those Essenes 
who believed in the latter date must have looked to 
the 16th Nisan with an extreme excitement, with a holy 

1 Not only is the personal appearance of Elijah described like that of the 
Baptist, but the chief events in the lives of both took place in the same 
wilderness of the Bead Sea, where the Essenes had their settlements. 

a Corap. Spiegel, Acad, dcr IViss. VI. § 89 ff.j JJic Plejaden, 71. 


expectation. Those who, like the Baptist, had doubted 
whether Jesus was He that should come, must have 
expected to see their doubts set aside or confirmed at 
morning-dawn on this day. If Jesus should then rise 
visibly, and on the supposition that he had died on the 
14th Nisan, he was powerfully manifested, not only as 
the firstling of the general resurrection, and as Son of 
God, as the Essenes expected of the Messiah, but his 
death and resurrection had been typified by two Mosaic 
institutions, by the slaying of the Paschal lamb and the 
offering of the Paschal omer. 

Delegates from the Sanhedrim had, already on the 
14th Nisan, chosen a spot in a field near Jerusalem, 
where a few bundles of the first ripened barley were 
reaped at sunset on the 15th Nisan, and brought into 
the court of the Temple. The corn having been duly 
prepared, an omer of barley-flour, the tenth part of an 
ephah, was, in the earliest morning-hour of the 16th 
Nisan, offered in the Temple. Since the previous day, 
the loth Nisan, the first day of the Paschal Feast 
was kept holy as a Sabbath, on whatever day of the 
week it might fall, the time of the presentation of the 
Paschal omer could not be more accurately referred to 
than in the words in which, in the Gospel after Matthew, 
the time of the resurrection of Jesus on that same day 
is determined : 4 In the end of the Sabbath, as it began 
to dawn towards the first day of the week.' On * the 
morrow after the (Paschal) Sabbath,' and the third day 
after the slaying of the Paschal lamb, when the barley- 
sheaf, or rather the omer of barley-flour, was waved by 
the priests before the Lord, and when the Israelites 
offered ' an he-lamb without blemish ' for a burnt-offer- 
ing, it was on that day that Jesus was believed to have 
been visibly raised from the dead, and on the clouds of 
heaven, as the son of man of the Danielic vision, to 
have been brought before God. 

The following parallel between the offering of the 



firstling-Sheaf and the reported resurrection of Jesus 
could not but strike the Essene, who, on the strength of 
his figurative interpretation of Scripture, expected an 
Angel-Messiah. After the slaying of the Paschal lamb 
on the 14th Nisan, on the third day following, in the 
early morning hours of the 16th Nisan, a measure of 
flour obtained from the first ripened corn, from the 
firstling-sheaf, was offered before God, which sheaf of 
the first ripened barley had been on the 15th Nisan cut 
off from the land which bore it, from a field outside 
Jerusalem. Thus the early ripened or early perfected 
servant of God ' was cut off from the land of the living,' 
and for the transgression of God's people ' was he stricken.' 
Jesus was ' brought as a lamb to the slaughter,' as anti- 
type of the Paschal lamb ; his life was made ' an offering 
for sin ' on a hill outside Jerusalem ; they gave him ' his 
grave with the wicked,' and heaped stones upon it, as 
on graves of malefactors, 1 ' though he had done wrong 
to no man, neither was deceit in his mouth.' But ' by 
his wisdom,' he, Jesus, the servant of God, has 'justified 
many,' he has borne ' their iniquities,' he has borne ' the 
sins of many,' and ' made intercession for the trans- 
gressors.' ' Free from the travail of his soul,' he has 
6 satisfied his eyes ; ' for ' the third day according to 
the Scriptures,' God raised him from the dead, as ' the 
firstfruits of them that sleep ' ; the ' One like a son of 
man,' was on the clouds of heaven brought before God. 
This parallel presupposes thel4th Nisan for Christ's death. 
A very different parallel would suggest itself to those 
who believed that Jesus had died, not on the 14th, but 
on the 15th Nisan, and who did not expect the Messiah 
promised by Moses to be an incarnate Angel, or the 
antitype of the Paschal lamb, the Lamb of God, nor 
that he would rise from the dead ' the third day 
according to the Scriptures.' 

1 Possible reference to Jeremiah, who was stoned to death in Egypt, ac- 
cording to Epiphanius. The Hebrew word ' Hamah,' hill or height, often 
refers to idolatrous heights. Bansen's Bibrfwcrlc to Is. liii. 


On the loth Nisan, according to generally received 
tradition, the Sinai tic law had been given ; and this was 
the day on which Israel, the firstborn of nations, was 
liberated from the Egyptian house of bondage, after 
that on the previous day the Passover had been slain. 
According to this typical parallel the spiritual liberation 
which Jesus had brought had been accomplished on 
the loth, not on the 14th Nisan, and it stood in no con- 
nection with the Mosaic institutions of the 14th and of 
the 16th Nisan. 

Only through the mediation of Essenes can Paul 
'also,' as Essenes before him, have received the tradi- 
tion, that Christ rose 'the third day according to the 
Scriptures.' Other circumstances likewise point to the 
Essenic origin of this doctrine, which the Apostles at 
Jerusalem can be proved not to have recognised. The 
new doctrine of Christ as the Lamb of God, that is, 
as antitype of the Paschal lamb, and which cannot be 
separated from the new doctrine about Messiah's resur- 
rection ' according to the Scriptures,' has been recorded, 
as by Paul and the fourth Gospel, so in the essentially 
Essenic Epistle of Barnabas, which we shall later consider. 

The disciples of John in the second century, the 
Essenic Jews, like the Jewish Christians, kept the legal 
Passover on the 14th Nisan, when Jesus had eaten the 
Paschal lamb with his disciples according to the first 
three Gospels. JeAvs and Jewish Christians formed the 
anti-Paulinic party of the Quartodecimans, and denied 
that Jesus died on the 14th Nisan, or that on that day 
a redeeming sacrifice by Christ could have taken place. 
But, in harmony with the fourth Gospel, the elders of 
the Church at Home maintained in the Paschal dispute 
the anti-Quartodeciman tradition, which was that of 
Paul and also, as we may now assume, of the Essenic 
Christians. The statements in the fourth Gospel are at 
the end of it attested as true by certain persons, whom 
we may regard as elders of the Eoman Church. 

p 2 


The Eoman and Paulinian party, which took its stand 
on the Gospel after John, was opposed during this dis- 
pute by the Asiatic Church, represented by Polycarp, as 
direct disciple of John, and bishop of Smyrna, who 
visited Borne in 155. He failed to persuade the bishop 
(Pope) Anicetus that, in accordance with the Apostle 
John's practice, the 14th Nisan ought to be kept by 
fasting, and that the contrary tradition of Roman elders 
ought not to be opposed to Apostolic tradition. 1 The 
Paschal dispute confirms the continued existence of two 
parties in the Christian Church, and their connection 
respectively with original Apostolic and with Paulinic 
tradition, as the latter is recorded in the fourth Gospel, 
in contradiction to the tradition, contained in the 
first three Gospels. 1 We may also infer, that the 
Gentile Christians, who kept aloof from the Jewish 
Christians, and still assembled in separate churches in 
Rome about the middle of the second century, accord- 
ing to the testimony of Justin Martyr, had then risen 
in this city to higher influence. It is the time when 
the leading Gnostics (Essenes?) nocked to Rome, when 
they addressed the question to the elders of this 
Church, whether it be expedient to pour new wine, 
possibly the Essenic-Paulinian doctrine, into old skins? 
It was by the chiefs of the Jews, probably by the 
elders of the essentially Jewish-Christian Church in 
Rome, said to have been founded by Peter, whom Paul 
called a Jew at Antioch, that Paul Avas regarded as the 
member of a sect 'everywhere spoken against.' 

In the fourth Gospel, where alone the narratives 
about the crucifixion and resurrection correspond with 
the two Mosaic types, as with Paulinian and probably 
Essenic tradition, the statement is contained, of which 
there is no trace anywhere else, that several of the 

1 Eus. H.E. V. 24 ; comp. IV. 14 ; III. 3G. Hier. Be Fir. ill. 17 ; Chron. 
Pasch., 257. Comp. Hilgenfeld, Einleitimg in das N.T., Erste Ausy. 403 f., 
CDrf, 730, 736, 

' I OK THEY.' 213 

disciples whom Jesus had chosen, were disciples of 
John or Essenes, and that many of the Baptist's disciples 
believed in Jesus before he made his entry into Jeru- 
salem. Again, Paul designates Jesus as the firstfnrits 
or firstling of them that sleep — as if he had in view 
the type of the firstling-sheaf. Finally, as only in the 
fourth Gospel the parable of the corn of wheat is con- 
tained, which brings not forth fruit unless it die, so 
Paul writes : ' What thou sowest,' that is, a mere corn 
or grain, ' is not quickened unless it die.' The writers 
of both passages may have had in view the first ripened 
corn offered in the morning of the resurrection-day. 

The Essenic origin of the tradition about the resur- 
rection of Jesus on < the third day according to the 
Scriptures,' will increase in probability in the same 
degree as it may become possible to connect the fourth 
Gospel with Essenian, Paulinic, and Roman tradition. 
Already now we are enabled to assert, that the narra- 
tives about the resurrection, contained in the first three 
Gospels, have been added to the revised text of the 
most ancient Gospels, probably not before the publi- 
cation of the Fourth Gospel in the second century. For 
we have proved by comparison of the Scriptures, that 
the resurrection of Jesus, testified by Paul and the 
fourth Gospel as having taken place 'the third day 
according to the Scriptures,' was neither expected by 
the twelve Apostles, nor can at any time have been 
believed by them. 

The Apparitions of Jesus after Death. 

Paul asserts that the twelve Apostles, convinced by 
apparitions, had proclaimed the resurrection of Jesus 
to believing audiences. But he does not say that any 
of these apparitions of Jesus took place at the empty 
grave, or that an empty grave had been attested, nor 
that these apparitions convinced the Twelve that Jesus 


had risen ' the third day according to the Scriptures.' 
Paul assures us that all the Apostles preached Christ 
risen from the dead : ' Whether it be I or they, so we 
preach and so ye believed.' The Apostle does not say 
that all the Apostles preached like him, ' that Christ 
died for our sins according to the Scriptures,' that is, 
as antitype of the Paschal lamb, ' and that he was 
buried and that he rose again the third day according 
to the Scriptures,' that is, as antitype of the Paschal 
omer. The twelve Apostles could not believe in the 
resurrection of Jesus on the third day, and therefore, 
also not that he was the antitype of the Paschal lamb, 
and in this sense the Lamb of God. Nor can it be 
asserted that either they or Paul believed that the 
body of Jesus in the grave had been saved from 
corruption. It is all the more important that the 
narratives about apparitions of Jesus after death rest 
on better evidence. We have sufficient ground for our 
conviction, that by his appearing after death, wherever 
and whenever it may have been, Jesus has confirmed 
the ancient belief in a life beyond the grave, and he 
has raised that traditional belief to an incontrovertible 
fact. As such, the resurrection of Jesus has been 
asserted by the first teachers of Christianity, although 
they could not and did not all agree as to the supposed 
typical and supernatural import of this event. 1 

When seventeen years after the conversion of Paul 
to the faith of Stephen in the risen Jesus as the Angel- 
Messiah of the Essenes, the Apostles at Jerusalem gave 
him the hand of fellowship, they did so because they 
could not shut their eyes to the fact, that ' he that 
wrought for Peter unto the Apostleship among the 

1 There is nothing which could jiLstify the disconnection of the evidence 
of the apparitions of Jesus after death from the numerous stories that are 
extant of apparitions of dead men, and which are some of the undeniable 
proofs of superhuman, though not of supernatural, agency. Similar appari- 
tions after death have been attested not less forcibly in recent times with re- 
gard to Thomas a Becket and Savonarola. 


circumcision,' the same wrought also for Paul 'unto 
the Gentiles.' He who had chosen the twelve Apostles, 
was by them believed to be the man whom God 
anointed or made Christ, < with the Holy Ghost and 
with power,' and who as anointed man was ' the Son of 
the living God.' The same Jesus of Nazareth was re- 
garded by Stephen, by Paul and others, as the anointed 
Angel of God who had appeared to Moses, and to the 
Fathers in the wilderness, and had risen the third day 
after his death, ' according to the Scriptures.' On this 
latter point the twelve Apostles could agree to differ 
with Paul, whilst all disciples of Jesus believed and 
preached that Jesus lives, that he died and rose again, 
whether he was an anointed man or an anointed angel. 
Such a conviction, caused and confirmed by apparitions 
of Jesus after death, even if we assume that they had 
not in fact originated from a non-human source, would 
suffice to enable the Apostles to cast off all fear and 
despondency, and to merge their differences, preaching, 
at the risk of their lives, Jesus crucified and risen. 

With regard to the recorded apparitions of Jesus 
after death, two more or less probable suppositions 
have to be considered. Either they originated in man, 
all or some of them, or they were determined by a 
non-human will. Possibly for more than a century 
before the commencement of the Christian era, those 
who were initiated in the mysteries of Essenic tradition 
seem to have cherished the hope, that the Angel- 
Messiah, whom they expected would rise on the third 
day after the slaying of the Paschal lamb as antitype 
of the same and of the Paschal omer. It cannot be 
denied that these expectations, even if we assume them 
to have been caused by the crucifixion of Jesus about 
the time of the slaying of the Paschal lamb, might 
mislead men into regarding what may have been mere 
phantoms, called forth by the intensity of their feeling, 
as real apparitions caused from without, such as they 


believed — we think rightly — to have been the excep- 
tional privilege of individuals in all ages. 

On the other side, it can be argued that the devout 
and mystically trained mind of the Essenes might have 
prepared them in an exceptional manner for seeing and 
rightly interpreting real, that is, objectively determined, 
apparitions. It may be surmised, that thus trained, 
the spiritual nature of the Essenes might have received 
a higher development; that the Essenes might thus 
have been enabled to discern the typical import of the 
Paschal lamb and of the Paschal omer ; and that the 
Essenes might have been led rightly to expect the 
resurrection of Jesus on ' the third day according to 
the Scriptures.' Assuming this, it could be held that. 
Jesus, the Angel-Messiah, was before Abraham, that 
he participated in the glory of God before the creation 
of the world, that the One like a son of man was 
brought before God on the clouds of heaven. 

On either supposition, whether Jesus did or whether 
he did not really appear to some after his death, the 
fact would remain, that what some men in bygone 
times had vainly desired to see and to hear, was seen and 
heard by contemporaries of Jesus, that is, they saw 
and heard the life and preaching, and apparitions after 
death of a man, according to others of an incarnate Angel. 
Those who believed that Jesus really appeared to them 
after his death, may have had, and they believed they 
had, exceptional and direct spiritual communion with 
a departed spirit, with a human soul raised in power. 
Nor need we think that this was the exclusive privilege 
of a few in the Apostolic age. 

The Day of Pentecost. 

According to the doctrines promulgated by Paul, a 
visible, local, or limited communication of the Spirit of 
God was not to be expected, even after the resurrection 


of Christ. Although the Apostle refers to the annual 
day of Pentecost, he does not refer to the Pentecostal 
miracle. It is even more surprising that his unsparing 
opponents in the Galatian and other Churches do not 
appear to have raised the objection to Paul's Apostle- 
ship, that he had not on the day of Pentecost received 
the Holy Ghost together with the twelve Apostles. 
Against such a charge of inferiority Paul must have 
defended himself in his Epistles, if it had ever been 
made. Far from admitting such a manifestation of the 
Spirit as man could have heard and seen, and as if 
during his lifetime no tradition about the Pentecostal 
miracle existed, Paul compares the manifestation of 
God's Spirit with what neither eye has seen nor ear 
heard or man's mind could conceive. Yet the account 
of the Pentecostal miracle as transmitted by the Acts is 
essentially in harmony with the spirit of Paul's clearly 
implied doctrine about the withdrawal of God's Spirit 
from mankind after the fall, and on the restoration of this 
power of God after the death of Christ, when he was 
made ' a curse for us ' so ' that we might receive the 
promised Spirit through faith.' 

The Acts commence Avitli the command given on 
the Mount of Olives to the Apostles by the risen Jesus, 
' through the Holy Ghost ' and at the end of forty days, 
that they should wait at Jerusalem ' for the promise of 
the Father,' which they had heard from him, that is, 
for the sending of the Spirit of truth, about which, 
according to the fourth Gospel, Jesus had spoken to his 
disciples. ' Not many days hence,' or, rather, ' not long 
after these days,' after these forty days of which neither 
Paul nor the Gospels give any account, the Apostles 
would be ' baptized with the Holy Ghost.' This dis- 
tinction of the future spiritual baptism through the 
Messiah from the baptism with water had been made 
by John the Baptist or Essene, again according to the 
fourth Gospel, when he pointed to that which Jesus, 


the Lamb of God, would do. The spiritual baptism of 
the Apostles at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, thus 
announced, is directly connected with a recorded pro- 
phecy of John the Baptist or Essene about the future 
coming of the Holy Ghost, of the existence of which 
certain disciples of John declared to Paul they had 
heard nothing. ' When the day of Pentecost was fully 
come,' or ' as the day of Pentecost was approaching its 
fulfilment,' that is, when the time had come for the 
fulfilment of what the Jewish feast of Pentecost was 
held to have prefigured, probably only by the allego- 
rising Essenes, a beginning of the re-established rule of 
God's Spirit took place, in harmony with the prophecy 
of John the Baptist or Essene as confirmed by the 
risen Jesus. 

Not long after the forty days, during which Jesus 
' showed himself alive after his passion by many infallible 
proofs ' or demonstrations, when he had been seen of 
the Apostles, and had spoken to them about the kingdom 
of God, that is, on the fiftieth day after his resurrection, 
was a great day in the Jewish calendar. Fifty days after 
the solemnity of the beginning of the harvest, early on 
the 16th Nisan, seven weeks after the offering of the 
firstling-sheaf or Paschal omer, after the time when 
the last wheat had ripened, the end of the harvest was 
solemnised. Of the last ripened wheat two loaves were 
made and offered to the Lord in the name of Israel. 
Also two lambs were offered as thank-offering, followed 
by fire- and sin-offerings and by festive meals. Jesus 
had died on the 14th Nisan, as antitype of the Paschal 
lamb, and had been raised again on the 16th Nisan, 
as antitype of the firstling-sheaf. So Paul and the 
fourth Gospel testify, and so the allegorising Essenes 
seem to have believed. This Messianic symbolism neces- 
sarily suggested, that fifty days after the resurrection of 
Christ, thus contemporaneously with the Jewish Pen- 
tecost, the disciples who followed him in the spiritual 


regeneration, and who might be compared with the later 
ripened wheat, that these brethren would be added, as 
it were, to the Lord's offertory. Also of the Jewish day 
of Pentecost it had to be expected that it would have a 
typical and Messianic importance. If the risen Christ had 
promised that in a few days the Apostles would be 
baptized with the Holy Ghost, as John had predicted, 
then an extraordinary operation of God's Spirit must 
have been expected on that fiftieth day. 

The Acts presume that the Apostles at Jerusalem 
did not doubt that Jesus had died on the 14th Nisan, 
had risen the third day according to the Scriptures, on 
the 16th Nisan, and that on the fiftieth day after the 
latter date the fulfilment of the promised spiritual 
baptism would take place. It is implied that in this 
expectation ' they were all with one accord in one 
place,' when on the tenth day after the ascension of 
Jesus, the day of Pentecost was approaching its fulfil- 
ment. The presence of the Holy Ghost, symbolised by 
fire, was attested by visible ' cloven tongues, like as of 
fire,' one of which ' sat upon each of them,' whereupon 
they all were ' filled with the Holy Ghost,' and thus were 
caused to speak 'with other tongues,' to the astonishment 
of a large concourse of people of many nations. 

According to the preceding disquisitions we assume 
as proved that it was impossible for the Apostles at 
Jerusalem to believe in this certainly Paulinic, and 
probably Essenic, symbolism, which is presupposed by 
the transmitted Pentecostal miracle. For this symbolic 
scheme presumes that the day of the crucifixion was 
the 14th Nisan, whilst the Apostles knew that the 
death and burial of Jesus had taken place on the loth 
Nisan, whereby this scheme was deprived of every 
possible typical basis. The Apostles also knew, that 
although the Baptist had described as future the 
coming of the Holy Ghost and, therefore, of the spiritual 
kingdom of God, yet that Jesus had attributed to the 


operation of the Spirit of God the miraculous works 
which he and others performed, thus designating the 
kingdom of God as already come, the Spirit of God as 
present in mankind before his crucifixion. The follow- 
ing recorded four facts form the groundwork for the 
doctrine of the Holy Ghost which is contained in the 
Acts. The just mentioned conception of the Baptist 
or Essene about the Messianic baptism with the Holy 
Ghost ; the doctrine of Paul, that the Holy Ghost, and 
with it faith, had not come till after the resurrection of 
Christ ; and, finally, the statements in the fourth Gospel, 
that the Holy Ghost had not yet come at the time of 
the crucifixion ; and that Jesus before his death promised 
to send the Spirit of truth. 

Like the doctrine of the resurrection of Christ, ' the 
third day according to the Scriptures,' which the dates 
in the first three Gospels exclude, the narrative in the 
Acts about the Pentecostal miracle cannot have been 
composed till about the time of the publication of the 
fourth Gospel, as introduction and confirmation of the 

The Atonement. 

The figurative interpretation of the Scriptures re- 
vealed to the Essenes their real intended meaning, as 
transmitted by the key of knowledge. Before others 
they have given a typical meaning to the Paschal 
lamb slain on the 14th Nisan, the blood of which had 
caused the avenging Angel of God to pass by the houses 
of the Israelites in Egypt. Even according to the literal 
meaning the blood of the lamb was regarded as a sign 
and necessary condition of atonement or reconciliation. 
If it has been shown that the Essenes expected as 
Messiah that same Angel who had also appeared to Moses 
in the burning bush, and gone before and followed 
Israel in the wilderness, then it will follow that the 
Essenes were led to regard this Angel-Messiah as the 


antitype of the Paschal lamb, and to expect that 
lie must necessarily by his blood make an atonement 
for the souls of men, as Aaron had done typically. 
Whether or not this can be proved to have been Essenic 
doctrine, it was certainly Paulinic doctrine. Paul 
is the only one among the authors of the New Testa- 
ment Scriptures, who has introduced the word ' atone- 
ment,' and connected it with the atonement made by 
the blood of Christ, as typified by the blood of the 
Paschal lamb, which blood had been yearly shed since 
the exodus from Egypt. 1 

In order to strengthen the preceding arguments, 
which connect Stephen and Paul with the Essenes, 
we shall now try to show that the leading doctrines 
and rites of the Essenes can best be explained by their 
presumable typical explanation of the legal sacrifices. 
Sooner or later after the crucifixion the Essenic 
disciples of Jesus must have believed that by the bloody 
sacrifice of his death, as the incarnate Angel of God, as 
the Angel-Messiah and antitype of the Paschal lamb, Jesus 
had brought about the fulfilment or end of the law. 

Under directly Divine guidance Moses had ordered 
the slaying of the Paschal lamb as a sign of the de- 
liverance from Egypt, that is, from the house of bon- 
dage. From these premises the Christian Essenes seem 
to have arrived at the conclusion, that the deliverance 
of the soul from its earthly house of bondage, from 
the bondage of sin and death, that the redemption 
wrought by the Angel-Messiah, by the crucified Jesus 
Christ, must have been typified by the slaying of the 
Paschal lamb. Those who believed Jesus to be the 
An^el-Mcssiali could not regard it as a mere chance 
coincidence that Jesus had been crucified, as Paul, 
and probably many Essenes affirmed, contemporaneously 
with the slaying of the annual Paschal lamb. Thus the 
14th Xisan was regarded as hallowed by the law, which 

1 Hum. v. 8-11 ; 1 Cor. v. 7. 


they believed was ' ordained by angels in the hands of a 

The Essenic Christians seem to have also believed that 
the crucified Messiah had been likewise typified by the 
fiery serpent, since fire was the symbol of the Spirit of 
God, brought by the Angel-Messiah, and since the abo- 
riginal symbol of the serpent connected the same with 
the serpent-formed lightning. The essentially Essenic 
Epistle of the Apostle Barnabas proves that the Chris- 
tian Essenes of the first century regarded the brazen 
serpent, the cross, and the Paschal lamb as types of the 
Messiah. The connection between Barnabas and Paul 
would lead us to expect that Paul followed Essenic tra- 
dition when he applied to Jesus Christ the symbol of 
the Paschal lamb, and consequently gave to the cross a 
new symbolical and sacrificial interpretation, of which 
there is not a trace in the Old Testament, or in the first 
three Gospels, which also do not refer to the brazen 

In this Essenic sense Paul could emphatically say, 
that he was ' determined not to know anything ' among 
the Corinthians ' save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.' 
For he regarded Christ as ' the end of the law,' who had 
become ' a curse for us ' by having been crucified, which 
is a curse according to the law. The typical sacrifices 
of the law were now brought to an end. This the 
Essenes believed to have rightly foreseen during at least 
a century and a half before the coming of Christ. For 
this reason they had abstained from all bloody sacri- 
fices, as the Eechabites had probably done before them. 

Philo, whose doctrinal principles are chiefly Essenic, 
and who was probably a Therapeut, explains that the 
offerings of frankincense on the golden altar within the 
inner Temple were more holy than the bloody sacrifices 
on the stone altar outside of it. The former figuratively 
showed our thankfulness 'for our rational spirit which 
was fashioned after the archtypal model of the Divine 


image ; ' both were ' symbols of things appreciable by 
the intellect,' and ' the mystical meaning which is con- 
cealed beneath them must be investigated by those who 
are eager for truth in accordance with the rules of alle- 
gory.' He states, that ' the altar of God is the grateful 
soul of the wise man,' and that * God looks not upon 
the victims as forming the real sacrifice, but on the 
mind and willingness of him who offers them.' 'Blood 
is a libation of life,' so that bloody sacrifices typified the 
offering of self. Under the archtypal model of the 
Divine image Philo understands the Essenic Angel- 
Messiah, whom he designates as ' the true Highpriest ' 
who ' has no participation in sin.' When men ' bring 
themselves ' as an offering to God, ' they are offering the 
most perfect of all sacrifices.' l Discerning the deeper 
and true sense of the letter, the Essenes had regarded 
it as their chief mission to prepare mankind for the 
coining of the atoning Angel-Messiah, for the Angel of 
God, who can ' pardon ' transgressions, because God's 
6 Name is in him,' for the incarnate Angel's vicarious 
and atoning death, and thus for the fulfilment of all, 
which was figurative, typical, and prophetic in the 
bloody sacrifices of the law. According to the figura- 
tive interpretation of the law by the Essenes, it is implied 
that the law pointed to the self-sacrifice of the Messianic 
Highpriest without sin. This symbolism Paul applies 
to Jesus as the Angel of God, and antitype of the Paschal 
lamb, as ' our Passover.' 

Christ redeemed us, or bought us off from the curse 
of the law, by resolving to suffer the death on the cross, 
to become ' a curse for us,' so ' that we might receive 
the promised Spirit through faith.' This faith came 
with Christ, and ' has nothing to do ' with the law. 
The promises to Abraham cannot be cancelled by 
the law given to Moses on Sinai. As to Moses so to 
Abraham, the Angel of the Lord, Christ, the Ange] 

1 ' Oil those who offer sacrifice,' 3-5. 


Messiah, had appeared. That Angel had redeemed 
Abraham ' from all evil,' had prevented the sacrifice of 
Isaac, and had, in the Name of the Lord, blessed ' faith- 
ful Abraham,' and all nations in his seed. In consequence 
of this Angel's voice from heaven, Abraham sacrificed 
a lamb. To the allegorising Essene the Paschal lamb 
of Moses would seem to have pointed back to the lamb 
sacrificed, instead of Isaac, at the Angel's command, 
and to have at the same time pointed forward to a 
future bloody sacrifice, not of an animal, but of an 
incarnate Angel, of the same Angel of God who can 
' pardon ' transgressions, or make an atonement, and 
who forbad the human sacrifice in the case of Isaac. This 
symbolism necessarily implied that the Angel-Messiah, 
as antitype of the lamb slain by Abraham and by Moses 
as the true Paschal lamb, would offer himself to God. 

Paul's doctrine of the atoning sacrificial death of 
the Messiah is a simple development of the typically 
interpreted narrative about the lamb slain by Abraham 
and by Moses, and its connection with the Angel of 
God, who appeared in Jesus as Angel-Messiah, in order 
to be crucified as antitype of the Paschal lamb. 

Before Christ ' our passover,' or Paschal lamb, had 
been slain, before he had become ' a curse for us ' by 
his crucifixion, we could not receive 4 the promise of the 
Spirit,' or the ' promised Spirit through faith.' When 
4 we were yet without strength, ' that is without the 
Spirit, which did not come till after the crucifixion, 4 in 
due time Christ died for the ungodly,' and now 4 being 
justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath 
through him ; for, if when we were enemies, we were 
reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, 
being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life; and 
not only so, but we also joy in God through our 
Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the 

The blood of the Messianic Paschal Lamb 'justifies' 


and * atones,' and saves from wrath, as the blood of 
the Mosaic Paschal lamb saved the Israelites from the 
avenging Angel, who can forgive transgressions or not 
do so, according to his will. 1 

This undeniable connection of Paul's doctrine of the 
atonement with an allegorical interpretation of the Old 
Testament, such as can only be proved to have prevailed 
among the Essenic, and thus the Therapeutic Jews, 
leads us to suppose that Paul may have drawn from an 
Essenic source. The essentially genuine and Essenic 
Epistle of Barnabas leaves no doubt that the Paulinic 
doctrine of the atonement was that of the Christian 
Essenes. But independently of this testimony, some 
Essenic rites seem to point to the existence of such 
a doctrine among the pre-Christian Essenes. 

The holy daily meal of the Essenes was preceded 
by the solemnity of a water baptism. The members of 
the secret society, who had sworn not to communicate 
a certain knowledge to the uninitiated, appeared in 
their ' white garments as if they were sacred,' they 
went into the refectory ' purified as into a holy temple,' 
and prayer was offered up before and after the sacred 
meal. It can only be compared with the Paschal meal 
of the other Jews. The bread figured in both, whilst 
among the Essenes water took the place of the wine at 
their meal on common days. But an especially sacred 
meal may be presumed to have been held by the 
Essenes on the 14th Nisan, and on this occasion the 
partaking of the cup with wine may have been excep- 
tionally ordained. As a similar exception to the rule, 
the Therapeuts were permitted to anoint themselves 
exceptionally on the Sabbath-day, to mark its holiness. 
Since the Essenes felt constrained by their principles 
not to slay the lamb ordained by the law, they would 
have especial reason to give a typical and Messianic 
significance to the bread and to the wine of the Jewish 

1 1 Cor. ii. 2, v. 7 ; Gal. iii. 13, 14, 23; Rom. v. 6-11 ; Ex. xxiii. 21. 



Paschal feast, and to transmit this significance to the 
bread of their daily meal, all the more if they had not 
a specially solemn meal on the 14th Nisan. 

The allegorising Essenes, especially the Therapents 
of Egypt, could not fail to connect the bread on their 
daily table with the twelve shewbread on ' the Lord's 
table.' They were placed near the candlestick, the 
form of which resembled a tree, so that the candlestick 
could be regarded as a symbol of the tree of life and 
knowledge, which ' beareth fruit every month.' Thus 
the twelve shewbread would be regarded as symbols of 
the yearly fruit of the tree of life. This symbolical 
meaning of the shewbread would lead the Essenes to 
regard the daily bread on their table as a symbol of 
the bread of life, and thus of Christ, the Wisdom of 
God. This assumption is in so far confirmed by Philo 
and Josephus, both of whom were probably allied with 
the Essenes, inasmuch as these writers of the first 
century connect the twelve shewbread with the twelve 
months of the year, and thus indirectly with the tree 
of life bearing fruit every month. To this interpre- 
tation seem also to point the other designations of the 
shewbread in Holy Writ, as ' the perpetual bread ' or 
' food of God,' or the ' holy bread,' which in the Syriac 
text is called ' the bread of the table of the Lord.' In 
the Book of Proverbs the Wisdom of God (Christ) is 
recorded to say : 4 Come, eat of my bread, and drink of 
the wine which I have mingled.' x 

The Egyptians represented the tree of life as a 
palm, or as a mulberry fig-tree, the former of which 
has fresh shoots every month, whilst there are mul- 
berry figs every month. 2 The stem of the Egyptian 

1 The two rows evidently referred to the six signs of the Zodiac in the 
upper and to those in the lower hemisphere. Prov. ix. 5. 

2 The parable of the fig-tree, whose time of figs was not yet come, 
though fruit was expected on it, seems to he best explained b} r the mulberry 


tree of life was in pre-Mosaic times represented as 
connected with the figure of the goddess Hathor, ' the 
eye of the sim,' or of Nutpe, the expanse of heaven. 
In the time of the Ptolemies the tree of life and know- 
ledge was in Egypt represented by the figure of the 
Divine Wisdom, or Sophia, which formed the stem of 
the tree and dispensed to the souls of the departed the 
water of life and the fruit of the tree of life. At this 
time the Therapeuts were established near Alexandria ; 
and then w r ere composed in this city, probably under 
Essenic influence, the Apocrypha of the Septuagint or 
scriptures of hidden wisdom. In one of them, in the 
Book Ecclesiasticus, the Wisdom described as palm-tree 
and vine, that is, as tree of life, is recorded to say : 
' Come unto me, all ye that be desirous of me, and fill 
yourselves with my fruits ; for my memorial is sweeter 
than honey, and mine inheritance than the honeycomb. 
They that eat of me shall yet be hungry, and they 
that drink of me shall yet be thirsty.' 1 

In Hebrew, to make an alliance or covenant, or to 
eat, is expressed by a similar term, for ' bara,' to eat, 
forms the root of ' berith,' or covenant. In this sense, 
the eating of the shew^bread, or perpetual bread, by the 
priests, is designated as a ' memorial ' and an ' ever- 
lasting covenant.' Not only was bread and wine brought 
forth by Melchisedec when he blessed Abraham, but it 
was offered to God and eaten before him by Jethro and 
the elders of Israel, and some, at least, of the mourning 
Israelites broke bread and drunk ' the cup of conso- 
lation ' in remembrance of the departed, ' to comfort 
them for the dead.' < A new covenant ' was announced 
by Jeremiah for a future day, when God would write 
his law in the hearts, when all shall know God, and 
when he wall forgive iniquity and no longer remember 
sin. Looking for allegories, the Essenes would connect 

1 Ecclus. xxiv. 19-21. 

3 Lev. xxiv. 5-9 ; Hos. ix. 4 ; Jer.xvi. 7 ; xxxi. 31 -34. 
Q 2 


this new and atoning covenant with the reign of the 
Angel-Messiah whom they expected, with the Angel of 
the Lord who can pardon transgression. To those 
Essenes who regarded Jesus as the Angel-Messiah, 
Jesns Christ was the incarnation of the Divine Wisdom 
who distributes the heavenly manna, the bread of life. 
If the Essenes, like Paul, identified Christ with ' the 
Wisdom of God,' it followed that Christ, or the Wisdom 
of God, must in a figurative sense be eaten and drunk, 
in accordance with the Books of Proverbs and Ecclesias- 
ticus, and Egyptian representations. 

Only in this figurative sense, and in connection with 
this Hebrew-Egyptian symbolism, Jesus can have said, as 
according to the fourth Gospel he has said, that his 
flesh is ' the living bread which came down from 
heaven,' and that whosoever shall eat thereof shall not 
die ; but that he that shall not ' eat the flesh of the son 
of man and drink his blood ' has not ' eternal life,' and 
Jesus will not ' raise him up at the last day.' 1 Whether 
Jesus really has spoken these words, and why the first 
Evangelists should have kept them in secret, depends 
upon the question, whether Jesus regarded himself as 
antitype of the Paschal Lamb, and his death as the 
atoning and vicarious sacrifice which would essentially 
change the relation between God and man. For ac- 
cording to the above narrative, Jesus also said that he 
would give his flesh as heavenly bread ' for the life of 
the world.' 

Unless we have failed to prove that the Essenes and 
Therapeuts expected an Angel-Messiah, and that many 
regarded Jesus as the incarnation of the same, we are 
now permitted to assume that the Essenes would hold 
the ' angels' bread ' to have become flesh and blood in 
Jesus Christ, that they would believe, as Paul did, that 
the Paschal bread broken by Jesus, had become ' the 
communion of the body of Christ,' the cup blessed had 

1 John yi. 48-58. 


become ' the communion of the blood of Christ.' This 
assumption is confirmed by Clement of Alexandria, to 
whom the ancient doctrines of the Therapeuts in and 
near that city must have been well known, and who 
thus interprets the Passover of the Christians : ' The 
blood points out to us the Word, for as rich blood the 
Word (that is, Christ) has been infused into life .... 
the Word Himself, the beloved One, our nourisher, 
hath shed His own blood for us, to save humanity . . . ; 
the flesh figuratively represents to us the Holy Spirit,' 
and thus ' the Lord who is Spirit and Word.' l 

Without sanctioning the Essenic views about the 
Angel-Messiah, and his sacrificial death as antitype of 
the Paschal lamb, which expectations Jesus seems to 
have opposed, he must have referred to his approach- 
ing death, when for the last time, and as he had 
heartily longed to do, he partook of the Paschal lamb 
with his disciples. We may presume that the acci- 
dental coincidence of the Passover Feast with his death, 
led Jesus to refer on this, his Last Supper, to the 
liberation of Israel from the Egyptian house of bon- 
dage, of which the Paschal lamb, at that time insti- 
tuted was the ' memorial.' This connection might have 
further led him to suggest, that the Mosaic Exodus 
was a parallel to the liberation of mankind from that 
spiritual bondage, against which Jesus had protested 
by word and deed, by an obedience unto death. In 
this sense Jesus could connect his approaching death, 
not with the Paschal lamb which he had just eaten, and 
which on that same 14th Nisan Moses had ordered to 
be annually slain 1600 years ago, but with the libera- 
tion of Israel which followed it on the 15th Nisan, on 
the day when Jesus was to be crucified. 

If the new, the spiritual and atoning covenant 
announced by Jeremiah was the kingdom of heaven 
which Jesus had come to establish on earth, he might 

1 1 Cor. x. 10; Paed.i.6. 


have compared it with the ' memorial,' memorial-feast, 
or covenant instituted by the eternal Wisdom of God, 
represented in pre-Christian times as distributing celes- 
tial food and drink to the souls of men. Eegarding 
the Divine covenant made with Moses as a type of the 
new covenant, and since the former was symbolised by 
blood, and thus by the symbol of the soul, by ' the 
blood of the covenant, which the Lord hath made,' 
Jesus could not fear to be misunderstood if he called 
that new covenant which he brought ' the New Testa- 
ment (or covenant) in my blood.' * Jesus could say 
this without even indirectly suggesting that his death 
was typified by the slaying of the Paschal lamb, that 
the blood of the yearly slain lamb points to his blood, 
which the following day would be shed on the cross, in 
consequence of a presumable affixing of his body by 
nails instead of ropes according to Eoman custom. 
What Jesus is said to have commanded was to be done 
not in remembrance of his death only, but of his life. 
As bread was eaten at the burial of the dead, and ' the 
cup of consolation ' was partaken by Israelites ' to com- 
fort them for the dead,' so Jesus may have commanded, 
and we believe that he did so command, his disciples 
and followers to eat bread and drink wine, as they had 
just done at the Passover, but to do so henceforth in 
remembrance of him. 

Jesus could not designate himself as ' the Passover ' 
or Paschal lamb, slain for us, as Paul calls him, without 
admitting the Divine sanction of his death on the cross, 
nor without thereby implying that his death was to be 
an event which would essentially change the relations 
between God and man. Since no possible types in the 
Old Testament could be referred to an atoning Messianic 
death, since even the allegorising Targum did not so 
interpret the isolated passage in the Book of Isaiah 

1 Ex. xxiv. 8 ; Ilebr. ix. 19, 20 ; Matt. xxvi. 28 ; Rom. iii. 24, 25 ; 
1 Cor. xi. 25. 


about the sufferings of the servant of God, Jesus could 
not have left his disciples in ignorance or doubt as to 
the importance of his death. The knowledge of the 
atoning death of Jesus as antitype of the Paschal lamb, 
6 according to the Scriptures,' might have prevented 
Judas Iscariot from betraying innocent blood, and 
certainly would have prevented his attempt to atone 
for his crime by suicide. We saw that the first three 
Gospels are silent with regard to the Messianic antitype 
of the Paschal lamb, and the recorded prayer of Jesus 
in Gethsemane, and his words on the cross, seem even 
to exclude the belief of Jesus that his death on the 
cross was divinely appointed as means of salvation. 

Yet Paul solemnly states, that a new sacrament has 
been instituted by Jesus, instead of the Paschal rite, 
and that this fact has been communicated to him in 
some mysterious manner by ' the Lord.' He asserts 
that 'the Lord Jesus, in the night when he was be- 
trayed, took bread, and pronounced the thanksgiving, 
brake it, and said : This is my body, which is given for 
you, that do in remembrance of me. After the same 
manner (he took) also the cup after supper and said : 
And this cup is the new Testament in my blood, that do 
ye, as often as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For 
as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do 
show the Lord's death till he come.' 1 

Paul accepted and applied to Jesus, as we tried to 
show, the Essenic doctrines about Christ as the Angel- 
Messiah, and about his atoning death as Lamb of God, 
with which doctrines that about the Last Supper is 
inseparably connected. The earliest account of the 
Last Supper, as contained in the First Epistle to the 
Corinthians, is repeated literally in the Gospel after the 
Paulinic Evangelist Luke, as if no other than Paul's 
authority could be claimed for it. Luke distinguishes 
between the Passover and the new sacrament, which 

1 1 Cor. xi. 23-26 ; comp. Luke xxii. 10,20. 


Matthew and Mark do not. The fourth Gospel does not 
say, but implies that Jesus introduced a new institu- 
tion. This omission, all the more important because 
the Gospel after John is the Gospel of the Lamb of 
God, we have explained by the impossibility to har- 
monise the different dates about the crucifixion in the 
first three Gospels and in the fourth Gospel respec- 

Assuming that what Paul had received about the 
Lord's Supper had been communicated to him by one 
or more organs of the Essenic secret tradition, 1 he 
might have designated this communication as come to 
him from 'the Lord,' because it harmonised with the 
voice in his heart, with the Father's revelation of his • 
Son in him on his way to Damascus. Paul's narrative 
about the Last Supper, like that about the resurrection, 
seems to have been the source of all parallel notices in 
the Gospels. The Apostle's accounts were certainly 
written some time before the composition of the earliest 
Gospels transmitted to us, and probably about eighteen 
years after his conversion to the faith of Stephen whom 
we have connected with the Essenic Therapeuts of 
Alexandria. What we may now call the Essenic inter- 
pretation of the reported institution of the Last Supper, 
whether strictly historical or not, had become firmly 
established in many Christian Churches before Paul 
wrote his account of it. 

The Apostles could believe his narrative to be based 
on a historical fact in the sense in which Essenes distin- 
guished a literal and a higher figurative meaning of 
the Scriptures. It was for the Essenes not enough to 
know what words Jesus did actually pronounce on this 

1 During the three years spent in Arabia, after his conversion by Ananias 
(the Essene) to the Christian-Essenic faith, Saul may have passed through 
the Essenic noviciate of three years, as Josephus seems to have done with 
Banus. As initiated Essene Paul would have been bound by oath not to 
speak 'the hidden wisdom' to others than 'the perfect' or initiated. 
(1 Cor. ii. 6, 7.) 


and on other occasions, they also held it necessary to 
find out what his words were meant to imply to those 
who had been initiated into the mysteries of allegorical 
Scripture interpretation, how from the dead letter the 
quickening spirit has to be developed. These concep- 
tions would necessarily lead those Essenes who believed 
in Jesus as the representative of their doctrines, to 
attribute to him words, possibly spoken in secret, which 
implied what they felt convinced was in his mind, when 
he spoke to the people in parables only, and when even 
his disciples were unable to understand all the mysteries, 
which should afterwards be revealed to them. These 
recorded words of Jesus, recorded by Essenes, but which 
they may never have heard him speak, were to be the 
medium of conveying the method of spiritually discern- 
ing the more perfect doctrine of Christ, ' the mysteries of 
the kingdom of heaven.' 

Philo, and probably all the initiated Essenes in 
pre-Christian times, had enlarged the meaning of the 
recorded words of Moses, of Psalmists, and of Prophets, 
in order to make them point, in accordance with their 
assumed hidden meaning, to the Essenic doctrines of 
the Angel-Messiah. Sooner or later the Essenes con- 
nected with the latter his atoning death as antitype of 
the Paschal lamb, and his resurrection as antitype of 
the Paschal omer on the third day after it. These two 
Mosaic institutions, by what was written about them, 
certainly did not point typically to the future, the one 
to Messiah's death, the other to his resurrection. Yet 
they were probably by Essenes, and certainly by Paul, 
held to convey the truth by suggesting it to such to 
whom in future ages it would be given to ' discern the 
Lord's body,' to regard the death of Jesus as the antitype 
of the Paschal lamb, and thus the Paschal lamb as a 
divinely instituted symbol of the Angel-Messiah's sacri- 
ficial death as the Lamb of God. 

Paul seems to have confidently believed during the 


first years after his conversion to the faith of Stephen, 
that Jesns had recognised the Messianic conceptions of 
the Essenes, that he did reveal himself as the Angel- 
Messiah and Lamb of God, although not to the people, 
yet to those to whom it was given to know ' the 
mysteries of the kingdom of heaven,' and that he, as 
antitype of the Paschal lamb, had instituted a new 
sacrament in the place of the Passover, and in con- 
nection with his atonement by ' the blood of his cross.' 
Paul may also have for a time believed that this was 
the doctrine of Christ which the Apostles kept in secret, 
its publication being forbidden by the chiefs of the 
Jewish Church. But already his mysterious meeting 
with Peter, and still more, the fear which he inspired 
in all the Apostles at Jerusalem, notwithstanding the 
conciliatory conduct of Barnabas, must have convinced 
Paul that Jesus had not sanctioned the typical refer- 
ence of the Paschal lamb and of the Paschal omer to 
himself as to the Angel-Messiah whom only Essenes 
expected. Paul must have known, that Jesus had not 
been crucified, contemporaneously with the Paschal lamb, 
on the 14th, but on the 15th Nisan, so that there was no 
historical foundation at all for the typical scheme of 
Paul, which he seems to have received through the 
Therapeuts, to whom Stephen belonged. 

The Essenic doctrine of Christ which Paul promul- 
gated could be developed from the Old Testament by 
a figurative interpretation of the same, such as the 
following : 

The Angel of the Lord, and therefore Christ, the 
spiritual Eock which followed the Israelites, can pardon 
the transgressions of men, for God's ' Name ' or Spirit is 
in him, whilst it had been withdrawn from mankind. 
Because Jesus is the incarnation of the sin-removing, 
the atoning Angel, therefore ' the body ' and ' the blood ' 
of Jesus Christ, that is, the incarnate ' Wisdom of God,' 
constitutes the first ' temple of the Holy Ghost ' after 


the fall of Adam. Whosoever believes this, receives 
the same spirit, Christ dwells in him by faith, and such 
a believer becomes also a temple of God, for the Spirit 
of God dwells in him again since Christ has brought 
it back from heaven. By the quickening or lifegiving 
spirit which Jesus, as ' the man from heaven,' as the 
Angel of God, has brought to mankind; by the first 
manifestation of such flesh and blood as can inherit the 
kingdom of God ; by Him who, as Son of David and as 
Son of God, was the first proof that ' mortal can put 
on immortality ' ; by ' the firstfruits of them that sleep ' 
a transformation of human nature has taken place. 
Henceforth mankind forms One mystical body, for 
God's Spirit is now potentially in every man, since the 
incarnate and anointed Angel has brought those near 
who were afar off so long as they had not this spiritual 
link, which constitutes the real presence of Christ. 

The manna in the wilderness was the symbol of the 
< angels' food,' of the spiritual sustenance of man, of 
the power which creates conscience. The fruit from the 
tree of life and knowledge, the bread and water of life, 
comes to him from without, whence Christ Jesus, the 
Angel of God and Bread of Life, has brought it. The 
mystical breaking of bread, the eating of bread before 
the Lord, refers to this bread from heaven ; and the 
bread in the hand of the priest, as once the Paschal 
bread in the hand of Jesus, symbolises the extraneous 
source of the soul's sustenance. 1 In a similar sense the 
incarnate Angel is the tree of life, the vine which God 
has planted, and the life-giving essence rises from the 
Divine root through the vine to the branches. In the 
unity of that mysterious vital force which was believed 
to have an absolutely non-material origin, root, vine, 
and branches are one. In all men is Christ Jesus, in 
the same sense that God the Father is in Him who is 

1 In this sense Keble's revised lines convey a true meaning : ' As in the 
hand, so in the heart.' 


the Son of God ' according to the Spirit of Holiness,' 
whilst according to the flesh lie is the Son of David. 
By his spiritualised flesh, which was only ' like ' sinful 
flesh, by flesh with God's Spirit, the incarnate Angel of 
God has brought about a reconciliation of the world with 
God, the spiritual atonement, the righteousness of God. 

At the time of the crucifixion of Jesus the Holy 
Ghost was not yet come. This was the Paulinic, and 
Ave may now venture to say, the Essenic, doctrine of 
Christ. If the direct connection has been sufficiently 
proved between the Paulinic doctrine of the atonement 
and the Old Testament-doctrine of the atoning Angel of 
God, avIio was incarnate in Jesus, the Angel-Messiah, 
then it follows conclusively that Jesus cannot have 
sanctioned the doctrine of the atonement by his blood, 
without at the same time revealing himself as the 
anointed Angel, as Angel-Messiah, of which doctrine 
there is no trace in the Scriptures before the Captivity, 
nor in the first three Gospels. Although Jesus regarded 
himself only as the anointed Man, and in this sense as 
the Messiah, he may yet probably have been led by the 
chance-circumstance of his crucifixion taking place 
during the Passover, to institute a new Paschal or 
Easter rite. We believe that lie did so, and that he 
connected it with, though he did not substitute it for, 
the Mosaic Paschal rite. But we may confidently 
assert that Jesus, if he has instituted a new sacrament, 
he did not thereby, or by any word or intended inter- 
pretation of the same, wish to convey that his ap- 
proaching death was the antitype of the Paschal lamb, 
a sin-removing, atoning, and vicarious sacrificial death, 
of which the Paschal lamb was by God intended ■ as a 

The mission of Jesus on earth was not finished on 
the 14th Nisan, when the Paschal lamb was slain and 
by him eaten with his disciples ; but on the 15th Nisan, 
on the same day of the year when Moses led the 


children of Israel out of the bondage of Egypt. Jesus 
wished to put an end to the spiritual bondage of Israel 
and of mankind. He pointed out to man his freedom 
to become a citizen of the kingdom of heaven, which 
the Scribes and Pharisees had shut up by taking away 
the key of knowledge, by their preventing, instead of 
fostering by word and deed, the conviction that the 
Spirit of God is in man. 

Jesus has indirectly protested against the Essenic 
doctrine of the Angel-Messiah, by his remark that John 
the Baptist or Essene did not belong to the kingdom 
of heaven. This kingdom, the rule of the Spirit of God 
in and through man, John regarded as future, though 
near, Jesus as being already come, as being like the 
Word of God near to man, that is, in his heart that he 
may do it ; and Paul testified that it had not come till 
after the atoning sacrificial death of Christ. From this 
and from other words of Jesus recorded in the first 
three Gospels, it follows that Jesus must have protested 
against the Essenic denial of the presence of the Spirit 
of God in man and in all ages, of which doctrine that 
of the atonement is the necessary consequence. If it 
had entered the mind of anyone to conceive, before the 
crucifixion of Jesus, that the Holy Ghost would not be 
given to mankind till after the sacrificial death of the 
Messiah, after the glorification of Jesus, as the fourth 
Gospel asserts, in harmony with Paul's teaching, then 
against such a doctrine would Jesus have solemnly 

The dogma of Jesus was that which is contained in 
the Sermon on the Mount. His creed was the deed. 

The spiritual union and communion between man 
and his God : this spiritual at-one-ment is the atonement 
or reconciliation of which it can be said that we have 
received it by Jesus Christ, inasmuch as the man Jesus 
of Nazareth, whom God 'has anointed with the Holy 
Ghost and with power,' has first clearly and fully 


proclaimed this relationship by word and deed. The 
atonement of Jesns Christ is the covenant of a good 
conscience with God. 


The convert to the faith of Stephen became the 
proclaimer of Jesns as the Angel-Messiah whom no 
other Jews than the Essenes and Therapents expected. 
Paul's doctrine about Christ was not that which was 
sanctioned by Jesns and by the Apostles whom he had 
chosen. John the Baptist or Essene, the Ashai or 
bather, and therefore called Assai or Essai, as Philo 
called the Essenes, did not recognise Jesus as Him that 
should come, that is, according to Essenic interpretation 
of Scripture, as the Angel-Messiah. Yet John paved 
the way for the application of that new doctrine to 
Jesus by Stephen and Paul. The Baptist believed that 
the promised Messiah who should come after him would 
be an incarnate Angel and would baptize men with the 
Holy Ghost. So little did he think it possible that the 
Spirit of God was already in mankind that, years after 
his death, disciples of his had not even heard that there 
is a Holy Ghost. No disciples of John were by him 
prepared to understand how Jesus and contemporaries 
of his could by the Spirit of God be enabled to drive 
out devils. But some disciples of John or Essenes, 
after the death of John and of Jesus, believed in the 
latter as the Angel-Messiah, and therefore expected the 
baptism with the Holy Ghost. These Essenes were the 
forerunners of Paid. 

Following in the footsteps of Stephen whom he had 
seen stoned to death, Paul taught that Jesus was the 
Angel who had been with the Fathers in the wilderness, 
the spiritual Eock who had followed them. According 
to Paul's Gospel the Holy Ghost was sent by God to 
mankind in consequence of the atoning, sacrificial, and 


vicarious death of Jesus Christ. Paul does not refer to 
the Pentecostal miracle, which is narrated in the Acts 
(of Luke, his fellow-worker?), but he certainly believed in 
the miracle which he asserts to have happened fifty days 
before the Pentecost. Paul taught that Jesus was 
crucified as the antitype of the Paschal Lamb, and that 
he rose from the dead ' the third day according to the 
Scriptures,' that is, as antitype of the Paschal omer con- 
taining the first ripened barley which was waved before 
the Lord on the 16th Nisan, fifty days before the day 
of Pentecost. 

Between the doctrines of Jesus and those of Paul 
there was not the same fundamental difference as 
between the doctrines of Jesus and those of John the 
Baptist, although the latter and Paul both represented 
Essenic doctrines, especially that of the Angel-Messiah, 
which Jesus had not sanctioned. Because Paul believed 
that the kingdom of heaven was come, because he 
recognised the Spirit of God among the Gentiles as 
among the Jews, therefore the twelve Apostles recog- 
nised him as a chosen organ of the Spirit of God, and 
thus as a follower of Jesus. They believed and taught 
that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God, 
because the man Jesus had by God been anointed ' with 
the Holy Ghost and with power,' had been made Christ. 
But Paul believed and taught, as Stephen had done 
before him, that Jesus was for quite another reason the 
Son of God according to the Spirit of Holiness, because 
he was the risen incarnate Angel of God, who created the 
world, the man from heaven, the Angel-Messiah, whom 
only the Essenes among the Jews expected. 

In spite of the essential difference of the doctrine 
about the person of Christ, Paul could and did agree 
with the other Apostles in this, that the only foun- 
dation of the Kingdom of God is the Spirit of God. 
Simon Jonah, that is, Simon the dove, the symbol of 
the Spirit, he who was also called Peter the Eock, the 


Apostle whose name referred to the spirit and to the 
rock, to the spiritual Rock, was moved by that Spirit 
of God when he made his great confession about Jesus 
being the Christ, the Son of the Living God, who pro- 
mised to build his Church on this spiritual foundation, 
on this spiritual rock. Paul acknowledged that the 
same ' spiritual rock ' is Christ. 

The doctrine of the anointed Angel, of the man 
from heaven, the Creator of the world, the doctrine of 
the atoning sacrificial death of Jesus by the blood of 
his cross, the doctrine of the Messianic antitype of the 
Paschal lamb and of the Paschal omer, and thus of 
the resurrection of Jesus Christ ' the third day accord- 
ing to the Scriptures,' — these doctrines of Paul, which 
can with more or less certainty be connected with the 
Essenes, could not be and were not recognised by the 
twelve Apostles. It becomes almost a certainty that 
Eusebius was right in surmising, that Essenic writings 
have been used by Paul and the Evangelists. Not 
Jesus, but Paul is the cause of the separation of the 
Jews from the Christians. 




Introduction — The Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews — ' The High- 
priest of our confession ' — Conclusion. 


The ' Epistle to the Hebrews ' is said to have been like- 
wise inscribed ' to the Alexandrians,' and it seems to 
have in view the Church at Alexandria, to which its 
probable author, Apollos, belonged. In the neighbour- 
hood of Alexandria the Egyptian Essenes or Therapeuts 
had their settlements, and with these Greek-speaking 
Jews, Grecians or Hellenists, we have connected Philo, 
and Stephen, the forerunner of Paul. The connection 
of Apollos with Paul renders it probable at the outset 
that the former, the eloquent and zealous Jew of 
Alexandria, stood likewise in connection with the Thera- 
peuts. All we know about Apollos harmonises with the 
characteristic features of the author of this Epistle, for 
which reason, ever since Luther, many Biblical inter- 
preters have regarded Apollos as its composer. This 
hypothesis receives a new confirmation from two re- 
ported facts, that Apollos was a disciple of John, or 
an Essene, and that the Epistle to the Hebrews is by 
Eusebius especially mentioned among those Scriptures 
of which he regarded it ' highly probable ' that they 
stood in direct connection with the written tradition of 
the Therapeuts. 

The Therapeuts distinguished a figurative from a 
literal interpretation of the Old Testament. Their deeper 



knowledge or gnosis we may identify with * the more 
perfect way of God,' in which Aqnila and his wife in- 
structed Apollos. The latter having known only ' the 
baptism of John,' like him seems not to have recog- 
nised in Jesus the Angel-Messiah, whom all the Initiated 
among the Essenes expected. But the initiation in the 
mysteries of tradition, by Aqnila and Priscilla, taught 
Apollos the disciple of John, that Jesus was the expected 
Angel-Messiah. Being ' fervent in the spirit ' Apollos 
had ' taught accurately about Jesus,' except that he 
knew only the baptism of John, that is, he had taught 
only within the range of the Baptist's teaching, but hav- 
ing been taught ' the way of God more accurately,' or 
4 the more perfect way of God,' — he knew and preached 
' that Jesus is the Christ.' 

As in the Acts ' the more perfect ' doctrine, taught 
by Aquila to Apollos, is contrasted to the doctrine of 
John the Baptist, so in the Epistle to the Hebrews ' the 
more perfect ' doctrine is contrasted to the ' elementary 
doctrine of Christ.' ' Therefore we will leave the elemen- 
tary doctrine of Christ and turn to the perfect ' doctrine, 
or ' to perfection.' x In this Epistle the writer contrasts 
with the ' weak ' and unprofitable law of Moses, which 
6 has done nothing towards perfection,' the covenant of 
Abraham, which according to Paul was confirmed ' of 
God in Christ.' Accordingly Aquila and also his wife 
Priscilla must have been initiated in the more perfect 
doctrine of Christ, which went beyond ' the baptism of 
John,' and referred to the baptism with the Holy Ghost 
by the Angel-Messiah. Since a similar deeper know- 
ledge or gnosis, based on a figurative interpretation of 
Scripture, was transmitted by the Therapeuts, we are 
led to surmise that Aquila and Priscilla may have be- 
longed to the Therapeuts, who alone admitted women to 
the initiation in their mysteries, and whom Eusebius 
identifies with the Christians of the Apostolic age, 

1 Acts xviii, 24.-2G ; v. 12; Heb. vi. 1. 


A Targumist and Greek translator of the Old Testa- 
ment, called Onkelos, Ankilas, Akilas, or Aquila, who, 
like the Aquila of the Acts, was from Pontus, is said to 
have been brought up by Eabbis in Jerusalem and to 
have been the contemporary of Gamaliel the elder and of 
the Apostles. From Pontus also was the Aquila who in- 
structed Apollos in a deeper knowledge or gnosis, which 
we may connect with the hereditary Targumistic lore. 
The identity of these two Aquilas is therefore highly 
probable. The Targum called after Onkelos or Aquila, 
though he was not the author of it, has been distinctly 
traced to Babylon, where it was collected, revised and 
edited, and it is distinguished from that called after 
Jonathan, composed in Judaea. 1 

Since the doctrine about Christ in the Epistle to the 
Hebrews can be proved to be the Essenic-Paulinic 
doctrine about the Angel-Messiah, Apollos, the pupil of 
Aquila (the Therapeut ?) if he wrote this Epistle, must 
have connected ' the more perfect doctrine of Christ,' to 
which he refers, with the secret tradition, deeper know- 
ledge or gnosis of the Therapeuts, which Paul had 
promulgated and Apollos developed. Such a doctrinal 
development of Paulinic doctrines as is contained in 
the Epistle to the Hebrews renders it highly probable, 
if not certain, that Apollos, of whom Paul writes that 
he watered what the Apostle had planted, is the author 
of this Epistle. We shall regard him as such. But if 
the tradition be preferred that Paul himself is its 
author, our argument would be all the stronger, that 
the doctrinal system of this Epistle cannot be separated 
from Essenic tradition, with which we have connected 
Paul. This Apostle also might have written the pas- 
sage in this Epistle about the elementary doctrine of 
Christ and the more perfect doctrine, deeper know- 
ledge or gnosis, since he wrote to the Eomans that his 
Gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ centred in 

1 Deutsch, in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, ' Versions,' p. 1657. 



'the mystery' which had been kept in secret, or in 
silence, since the world began. 

We regard the Church to which the Epistle to the 
Hebrews is addressed, probably that of Alexandria, un- 
like that of Antioch, as essentially free from the Gentile- 
excluding bondage of the law. The majority of its 
members we hold to have been universalist Therapeuts, 
who were in danger of falling into the snares of a 
narrower Judaism, presumably that of the Palestinian 
Essenes, for these insisted on the exclusion of the Gen- 
tiles. Barnabas, who probably belonged to those 
Levites who had become Essenes, is said to have taught 
in Alexandria. As Paul opposed his fellow-worker 
Barnabas in Antioch, so Apollos seems to have opposed 
Barnabas and his followers in Alexandria for a similar 
reason. The Epistle is certainly written before the de- 
struction of the Temple, which is described as existing. 
How early it was composed cannot be determined. The 
peculiar principles of the Alexandrian Church harmo- 
nised with those of the Therapeuts. 

The Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews. 

According to Philo's writings, ' the eternal Word ' 
is the archtype of Humanity. Man is created in the 
image of the eternal Word, and this Divine Word is 
more ancient than creation. The Word is not only a 
spiritual power which God uses as ' a rudder,' but a 
celestial being, the personal ' Son ' of God, the heavenly 
Highpriest, the Angel-Messiah of the Essenes and 
Therapeuts. It is only through the mediation of angels 
and therefore of the Angel of God, that men can become 
' sons of God.' ' The perfect man ' is ' the image and 
the form ' of the Divine Word, he belongs to ' the better 
species of men,' to those who can ' claim the Divine 
nature.' These are created by the first of the angels, 
by « the firstborn and ' eldest Son ' of God, by that 


being who ' in no wise departs from the Divine image/ 
by the ambassador and advocate of God, who is ' neither 
God nor man,' neither uncreated like God nor created 
like man, ' something on the border between uncreated 
and perishable nature.' This eternal Word or eternal 
Messiah Philo calls ' the great Highpriest of the con- 
fession,' and he is, according to Philo's conception, not 
a man of the past, present, or future, but the Angel of 
God who transmits the Holy Ghost. 1 It is evident that 
Philo's conception of the Messiah is the Essenic one of 
the Angel-Messiah, with which we have connected the 
Chris tology of Paul. 

The Epistle to the Hebrews begins by pointing out 
the connection between 'the Divine revelations in the 
old and the new covenant. ' God having in times past 
spoken unto the fathers by the prophets in sundry forms 
and in divers measures, hath in these last days spoken 
unto us by the Son.' Apollos follows Paul by designat- 
ing Christ, the Angel-Messiah, as participator in God's 
creation of the world. In direct connection with what 
is said in the Book of Wisdom about the Wisdom of 
God, to which in the Gospel of Luke words of Jesus 
have been attributed, Apollos describes God's Son as 
' the refraction of his glory and image of his being,' 
who, after having accomplished the purification of our 
sins, ' sat down on the right hand of the majesty on 
high,' as Stephen had first described him. According 
to the Philonian and Essenian doctrine of angels, the 
Angel-Messiah was held to be higher than all angels, and 
thus the Apocalypse of John had described Christ as the 
first of seven angels, in harmony with Eastern symbo- 
lism. Then Apollos wrote that the risen Jesus was made 
or became ' so much better than the angels, as he hath 
by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than 
they.' The learned Alexandrian and Therapeut in- 
structed by Aquila in the secret tradition of the Thera- 

1 De Ling. conf. 1 ; De Somn. 1 ; see p. 248. 


peuts, finds sufficient proof for his assertion in the 
Alexandrian version of the 2nd Psalm, which he 
refers not to Solomon's or another king's accession to 
the throne, but to the Angel-Messiah. So he cites, like- 
wise after the Septuagint, Nathan's promise to David, 
that Solomon, his son in the flesh, would build a temple 
to God, who will stablish his throne for ever, and who 
is recorded to have said, according to the Greek 
text : ' I will be to him a father, and he shall be to 
me a son.' 

Referring to the return of Jesus which by Essenic 
Christians was then considered to be near at hand,Apollos 
cites words of God, nowhere recorded in our Scriptures, 
according to which ' all angels shall worship him,' as 
they are recorded to have served Jesus on the occasion 
of his victory over Satan's temptation in the wilderness. 
Again, whilst God's angels are described as spirits (or 
winds) and his ministers flames of fire, Apollos ventures to 
assert, on the authority of the Septuagint, that the 45th 
Psalm does not refer to the Davidic kingdom as to a 
' throne of God,' but to the kingdom of the Son, to 
whom the Psalmist is assumed to have given the attri- 
bute of ' God ' : ' Thy throne, God, is for ever and 
ever.' If not the earliest, at all events the latest, real 
authority for this application of the Divine attribute is 
Philo, who calls the Son of God * the second God,' in 
harmony with the late Targumistic tradition, which 
identifies the Word or Memra, that is, the Messiah, with 
Jehovah. We are, therefore, not astonished that Apollos, 
again following the Greek text, changes the Hebrew 
Psalmist's words, which probably refer to the king's 
being anointed above his fellows by God, even his God. 
Instead of this, Apollos writes : ' therefore, oh God, thy 
God hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above 
thy fellows.' Finally, the assertion is repeated which is 
contrary to the 102nd Psalm, that not God, but the 
Angel-Messiah, has laid the foundations of the earth, and 


that the heavens are the work of his hands, for which 
reason, though they perish yet he remains, and is the 
same, and his years shall have no end. In this case 
Apollos can connect his new interpretation with the 
Hebrew text of the 33rd and 119th Psalms, in which it 
is said that ' by the word of the Lord are the heavens 
made,' and ' for ever, Lord, thy word is (remains) 
settled in heaven.' The latter Psalm is probably from 
the time of the Maccabees, whose allies were the 
Assida3ans or Essenes, so that the Word of God in this 
passage may have been referred, at least by the Initiated 
and possibly by the Psalmist, to a celestial being. As 
such in the Book of Proverbs and in the Books of 
Ecclesiasticus and of Wisdom the Word or Wisdom 
of God is designated. Paul had also implied a similar 
explanation of the engrafted Word as originating in a 
wisdom which descends from above. 

Apollos, like Stephen and Paul, has applied to Jesus 
Christ the Essenic doctrine of the Angel-Messiah, and 
so Apollos, like Paul, connects in the Epistle to the 
Hebrews with the Divine the human nature of Jesus. 
Although the expression ' the veil of his flesh ' might 
be explained in a superhuman sense by those who 
denied Christ in the flesh, as did the false teachers to 
which the First Epistle of ' John ' refers, yet Apollos has 
as clearly defined the human nature of Jesus Christ as 
Paul has done in one passage of the Eoman Epistle. 
According to Apollos, the author of the 22nd Psalm has 
in the spirit referred to the incarnation of the Angel- 
Messiah. He who is above the angels is ' not ashamed ' 
to call men his ' brethren ' and his children, just as God 
is declared not to be ashamed to be called the God of 
Israel's fathers. Because the Name or Spirit of God is 
in the Angel of the Lord, in the Angel-Messiah, and 
through him also in mankind, therefore ' he that sancti- 
fieth,' that is Christ, ' and they who are sanctified,' his 
brethren, are ' all of one.' Thus far it is only said that 


there is a spiritual union between the sons of men and 
the celestial Son of God. But Apollos, as if not satisfied 
with Paul's mysterious reference to 'the likeness of sinful 
flesh,' clearly states that Christ partook of the same 
flesh and blood as his children, and that he took on him 
' not the nature of angels,' but ' the seed of Abraham,' 
since c in all things it behoved him to be made like unto 
his brethren.' He also suffered and was tempted ' in all 
points like as we are, yet without sin ' ; and in the days 
of his flesh he ' offered up prayers and supplications 
with strong crying and tears unto Him that was able to 
save him from death.' It was because of his ' piety ' that 
he was heard, and ' though he was (a) son yet learned 
he obedience by that which he suffered, and being, 
made perfect he became the author of eternal salvation 
unto all them that obey him.' Christ Jesus could not 
have ' come to do ' the will of God unless he had been 
an Angel. 

The doctrine about Christ in the Epistle to the 
Hebrews is the Essenic doctrine about the Angel- 
Messiah which was first promulgated by Stephen and 
Paul, as applied to Jesus Christ. 

The Highpriest of our confession. 

' The firstborn,' God's ; Angel-Word ' or ' Archangelic 
Word,' the ' Angel being the Word,' His ' most ancient 
Word,' Philo calls ' God,' the ' second Deity,' and ' the 
Highpriest of the confession,' or of the Creed. 1 By apply- 
ing to Jesus Christ the latter title, and that of the ' Word 
of God,' Apollos confirms his evident relation to the 
doctrinal system of his great townsman. The gulf be- 
tween the spiritual and the material world was bridged 
over by God's ambassador, who is neither God nor 
man, by the Angel-Messiah of the Essenes. Those 

1 Be Conf. ling. 14; Be Soinn. i. 38, 30, 41 ; Quis est, 42; Be Mut. 
Nom. 13 ; Be Quest, et Sol. 02. 


who, unlike Philo, believed in the incarnation of the 
first of seven angels, and that Jesus was the incarnate 
Angel-Messiah who had brought the Spirit of God to 
mankind, were compelled to distinguish from the Mosaic 
covenant the new covenant of Christ as the fulfilment 
of the covenant promised to Abraham and his seed. 
Paul had said of this covenant that 430 years before 
the Sinaitic covenant it had been confirmed ' of God in 
Christ.' Christ or the Angel of God had been with 
Abraham as he had been with Moses on Sinai and with 
the Church in the wilderness. Because of sin the second 
retrograde ' weak ' and ' unprofitable ' law on Sinai, 
to which ' perfection ' is impossible, was promulgated 
through the mediation of angels, probably of lower 
angels. To these is contrasted the Angel of God who 
had followed the Israelites, Christ who had been made 
6 perfect ' in eternity or for ever, and who had become 
incarnate and brought the perfect covenant promised to 
Abraham. Hence it had become necessary to ' leave 
the elementary doctrine of Christ' and ' the first prin- 
ciples of the oracles of God.' Therefore a new High- 
priesthood was by Apollos contrasted to the Aaronic 
Highpriesthood ; and the former, like the new covenant, 
was traced back to Abraham, who had bowed before the 
non-Hebrew Highpriest Melchisedec. 

We have drawn attention to the distinction between 
a Hebrew and a non-Hebrew Highpriesthood, which 
seems to have been recognised before the Babylonian 
Captivity, if not ever since the time of Moses. We con- 
nected with this double Highpriesthood the two fines of 
the Aaronites ; that of Ithamar represented the priesthood 
of the naturalised strangers in Israel, to whom the Kenites 
of Jethro and the Rechabites belonged, with which 
latter the Essenes may safely be connected. We also 
showed that the 110th Psalm, probably written for the 
consecration of Joshua the Highpriest, seems to refer to 
this Highpriesthood for ever promised to Jonadab, the 


ancestor of the Bechabites, and whom the Psalmist calls 
his Lord. The Lord had spoken through the prophet 
Jeremiah unto the Psalmist's Lord Jonadab, to whom 
the promise had been made about the Highpriesthood 
for ever among the sons of Eechab. This eternal High- 
priesthood among the strangers or non-Hebrews in 
Israel the Psalmist connects with the Highpriesthood of 
the non-Hebrew Melchisedec, with ' the order of Mel- 

Whether the 110th Psalm had originally referred 
to and possibly was composed by Joshua, or whether 
it was composed by David, a descendant from non- 
Hebrews, to whom the superscription refers the same 
in the text transmitted to us, in either case the Psalm 
may be connected with the Bechabite Highpriesthood 
promised by Jeremiah to the sons of Jonadab or of 
Eechab, the strangers in Israel. The Essenes, whom 
we cannot disconnect from the Bechabites, would re- 
gard this promise as made to their order, and they 
would identify this eternal Highpriesthood with the 
Angel-Messiah whom they expected, whom Philo had 
called, and Apollos after him, 'the great Highpriest of 
our confession.' Apollos fully explains how the celes- 
tial Highpriesthood promised by the words of God 
recorded in the 110th Psalm, refers to Jesus, who, like 
David, was descended from non-Hebrews. 

The incarnate Angel-Highpriest and celestial son 
of God, 'Jesus, the Son*of God,' is 'passed through 
the heavens,' both at the beginning and at the end 
of his 'days in the flesh,' or as Paul had said, 'he 
that descended is the same that ascended.' Referring 
the 110th Psalm to Jesus, Apollos considers himself 
authorised to say, that Jesus was ' called ' or addressed 
by God as 'a Highpriest after the order of Melchisedec' 
Thus a hope is set before us, ' which we have as an 
anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and entering 
into the part within the veil, whither as forerunner on 


our behalf Jesus entered, having become an Highpriest 
for ever after the order of Melchisedec' In the He- 
brew language, which was that of Canaan, the name 
Melchisedec means 'King of Eighteousness,' and Salem 
or Shalem means ' peace ' or ' peaceful,' and probably 
here refers to Jerusalem. Not only the references to 
Jerusalem, to righteousness and peace, add force to the 
explanation of Melchisedec as type of Jesus the incar- 
nate Angel-Highpriest, but the omission of Melchisedec's 
descent, that is, of his genealogy, would suggest the 
mystery of the incarnation of Christ Jesus. Because 
neither the father nor the mother nor the genealogy of 
Melchisedec is referred to in Genesis, Apollos finds it 
easy to interpret the passage figuratively, in harmony 
with Essenic custom, to give it a deeper meaning than 
that conveyed by the literal sense, and to suggest 
mysteriously that the King of Jerusalem, who, in com- 
pany with the King of Sodom, went to meet victorious 
Abraham, had in fact neither father nor mother nor 
genealogy, ' and neither beginning of days nor end of 
life, but (being) like unto the Son of God, he abideth 
a priest for ever.' 

Apollos therefore clearly implies that Melchisedec 
was not only a type, but an earlier incarnation of the 
Angel of God, of the Word of God whom Philo had 
designated as ' neither God nor man,' and ' the great 
Highpriest.' Jesus is the full manifestation of the 
celestial Highpriest. Unlike the sons of Levi, who are 
not suffered to continue priests by reason of death, the 
celestial Highpriest, ' because he continueth for ever, 
hath his priesthood unchangeable,' or imperishable. 
Instead of human Highpriests, ' which have infirmity,' 
Jesus, as ' the Highpriest of our confession,' is ' the Son 
made perfect in eternity.' Apollos asserts, in accord- 
ance with his interpretation of the 110th Psalm, that 
this has been declared by the Word of God's oath, 
< after the law,' or, as thus implied, in the time of 


David, to whom the composition of that Psalm is 

' If perfection were (possible) by the Levitical 
priesthood (for on the ground of it hath the people 
received the law) what further need was there that a 
different priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, 
and that he should be called not after the order of 
Aaron ? For where the priesthood is changed, there is 
made of necessity a change of the law also. For he in 
reference to whom these things are spoken belonged to 
a different tribe, of which no man hath ever given 
attendance at the altar. For it is evident that our 
Lord sprang out of Judah, of (for) which tribe Moses 
spake nothing concerning the priests,' that is, concern-. 
ing those priests which might be taken from Judah for 
the Highpriesthood. 

This passage confirms the connection of the High- 
priesthood of Melchisedec and of Jesus, the non- 
Hebrews, with the Aaronic line of Ithamar, so called 
after Thamar, the non-Hebrew. For the line of Itha- 
mar had its possessions exclusively in Judah, where 
the Kenites or Eechabites had amalgamated with 
Hebrews, and during the war between Saul of Benjamin 
and David of Judah the line of Ithamar, represented by 
Abiathar, sided with David, the line of Eleazar, repre- 
sented by Zacloc, with Saul. Only in so far could 
Apollos assert that Moses spoke nothing concerning the 
priests which might be taken from Judah for the High- 
priesthood, inasmuch as, in fact, the Scriptures, which 
twice give the genealogy of the line of Eleazar, do not 
give the genealogy of the line of Ithamar. But Apollos 
was wrong in his assertion, for Eli and his successors did 
give ' attendance at the altar,' though they belonged to 
the junior Aaronic line, being priests of Judah as High- 
priests of the line of Ithamar. The promised eternal 
Highpriesthood of Eechabites in Judah, Ezechiel's 
uncircumcised Highpriests, to which Joshua or his 


antagonist in the sanctuary may have belonged, pro- 
bably were of the line of Ithamar. That youngest 
surviving son of Aaron may by Moses have been set 
over the Kenites of Jethro, and Ithamar's successors in 
office may have represented the Highpriestly order of 
the uncircumcised stranger in Israel. 

This Highpriestly order of non-Hebrews in Israel, 
of Eechabites and Essenes, we now venture to connect 
with the order of Melchisedec. Since the ethnic 
dualism in Israel, represented by Hebrews and natu- 
ralised strangers within the gate, had probably existed 
already in the time of Abraham, it is reasonable to 
assume that Moses recognised this dualism when he led 
the ' mixed multitude ' out of Egypt. If so, to the fusion 
of Hebrews and non-Hebrews, such as was exemplified 
by the Kenites settling with the tribe of Judah, the in- 
dependent Elohistic and Jehovistic narratives in the 
Mosaic Scriptures may owe their origin, as also the two 
chiefs of tribal tradition. According to this assump- 
tion, the lawgiver placed the two sons of Aaron respec- 
tively over the Hebrew and the non-Hebrew part of the 

From this it would not follow that all the members 
of Highpriestly families were descended from the two 
sons of Aaron. For, at all events, up to the time of 
the Exodus there is no trace in the Mosaic Scriptures of 
a priestly tribe or hereditary priesthood, but the eldest 
son inherited from his father the priestly office. Thus 
the men who offered sacrifices in the time of Moses are 
called ' young men from the children of Israel,' and 
Israel was ' a kingdom of priests and a holy people.' 
The Israelites had not deputed their priestly duty to 
representatives, and still less had given it up in favour 
of a hereditary caste, such as the Levites are described 
in the later Scriptures, called after Moses. Contrary to 
these later regulations, the sons of David are called 
priests, or Cohenim, literally, those who approach God, 


an expression which first occurs in the Bible in connec- 
tion with the non-Hebrew priesthood of Melchisedec 
and Jethro. By the side of a Hebrew Levitical priest- 
hood a non-Levitical one of the strangers in Israel seems 
to have existed, since the prophets Jeremiah and Ezechiel, 
and probably also the 110th Psalm, refer to it. Per- 
haps it is not a chance-coincidence that the name 
of Levi's eldest son, Gerson, refers to Ger the stranger. 
It becomes increasingly probable that Melchisedec, 
Jethro, Eli, and Joshua belonged to the order of the 
stranger in Israel, and that the same was presided over 
by the so-called sons of Ithamar since the time of 

Upon such possibly historical basis Apollos has by 
a free allegorising of the texts built up his theory of 
the celestial Highpriesthood of Jesus, the Angel- 
Messiah. If James the brother of Jesus really had the 
privilege of entering the Holiest of the Holy with the 
golden plate of the Aaronites on his forehead, the 
two brothers of Davidic or non-Hebrew descent may 
have belonged, as we shall suggest, to one of the High- 
priestly families of the strangers in Israel, to the so- 
called sons of Ithamar. John the Baptist or Essene, by 
his mother of Aaronite descent, may have belonged to 
the sons of Zadoc, which Highpriest was of the elder 
Aaronic line of Eleazar, after whom the Sadclucees seem 
to have been called, who with the Essenes defended the 
rigid maintenance of the law. 

Jesus opposed some doctrinal principles of John the 
Baptist ; and the Sadducees, probably allied with the 
line of Eleazar, persecuted Jesus. His opposition to 
the Temple-services was all the more dangerous if he 
and his brother James stood by birth in connection with 
the rival line of Ithamar. This connection, though not 
improbable, cannot be insisted upon. Be this as it may, 
the theory of the celestial and eternal Highpriesthood 
of Jesus Christ stands and falls with the theory of an 


Angel-Messiah. This theory was first applied to Jesus 
by Stejmen the Hellenist, probably of Alexandria, where 
the Therapeuts had their settlements, and who certainly 
was an Essene or Therapeut, since no other Jews can 
be proved to have expected an Angel-Messiah. Paul 
became a convert to the Essenic doctrines of Stephen, 
and what Paul planted Apollos has watered. 

We are therefore not surprised that Apollos in his 
Epistle has connected with the celestial Highpriesthood 
of Jesus the Paulinic doctrine about the atonement, 
which is the necessary consequence of the Essenic 
and Paulinic doctrine that God's Spirit was not in fallen 
humanity until the Angel-Messiah restored it. Apollos 
also regards the bloody sacrifices as types of the 
bloody sacrifice of Christ. 

' The tabernacle is a parable,' or rather a type or 
symbol, ' for the time now present, according to which 
are offered both gifts and sacrifices having no power to 
perfect in conscience,' or, ' according to conscience, him 
that attendeth to the service of God.' These ordinances 
were imposed ' until the time of reformation.' For this 
reformation the Essenes had been preparing mankind, 
looking to the coming of the Angel-Messiah who should 
appear, and now had appeared as ' Highpriest of the 
good things to come.' As the Highpriest had to enter 
once every year into the Holiest of the Holy, 1 so Jesus 
' entered once for all into the holy place, and obtained 
eternal redemption for us,' by entering ' through the 
greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with 
hands, that is to say, not of this creation, nor yet through 
the blood of goats and calves, but through his own 
blood. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and ashes 
of an heifer sprinkling the defiled, sanctifieth to the 
purity of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of 

1 Possibly on the shortest or the longest day of the year, when the sun, 
symbol of Divine presence, may have thrown a ray of light on the tabernacle, 
as it throws a shadow on the altar at Stonehenge. 


Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself 
without fault to God, purge our consciences from dead 
works to serve the living God ? ' . . . 'It was 
therefore necessary that the symbol of the heavenly 
(sanctuary) should be purified with such (sacrifices), 
but the heavenly (sanctuary) itself with better sacri- 
fices than (were) those. For Christ entered not into a 
holy place made with hands, the counterfeit of the true, 
but into heaven itself, now to appear before the face of 
God for us ; nor yet that he may offer himself often, 
as the Highpriest enter eth into the holy place every 
year with blood not his own ; for then it would have 
been necessary for him to have suffered oftentimes since 
the foundation of the world ; but now once at the end 
of the world hath he appeared for the putting away of 
sin by his sacrifice. And as it is appointed unto men 
once to die, but after that the judgment, so also Christ 
was sacrificed once, to take away the sins of many, and 
he shall appear a second time without sin to them that 
wait for him unto salvation.' 

Apollos refers to the bloody sacrifices not having 
6 ceased to be offered ' in the still existing Temple, though 
they had never been offered by the Essenes, and probably 
by all those who, like Jesus, attended only the service in 
the Synagogue. The Essenes claimed to have rightly 
foreseen that the Angel-Messiah would sanction the abo- 
lition of the bloody sacrifices, which were ordered by the 
law, and yet cannot ' take away sins,' as Apollos declares. 
Apollos interprets the Greek text of the 40th Psalm 
as containing a prophecy of the promised Messiah's 
protest against the bloody sacrifices. ' Burnt offering 
and sin-offering hast thou not required,' said David ; 
instead of such a written commandment, God is said to 
have given him perforated ears or ; open ears ' to hear 
the spiritual commandments of God. Thus he was ena- 
bled to say : ' Lo, I have come, 'or ' here I am . . to 
do Thy will, God, have I desired, as it is written for 


me in the volume of the book ; and thy law is within 
my heart.' These words of David are by Apollos 
explained, in harmony with the Septuagint, to refer to 
Messiah's coming ' into the world,' to the incarnation of 
the Angel, for whom God had 'prepared a body.' 

With this altered text Paul's saying may be con- 
nected, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom 
of heaven. Only as an Angel become incarnate in a 
body especially prepared by God, as an Angel in whom 
is the ' Name ' or Spirit of God, could the Messiah come 
to do the will of God, that is, to take away the bloody 
sacrifices that he may establish the spiritual or self- 
sacrifice. It is by this human body exceptionally pre- 
pared by God for the Angel-Messiah ; it is ' through the 
offering of the body of Jesus Christ,' in pursuance of 
his self-sacrifice, and of God's will done, that ' we have 
been sanctified once for all.' By this ' one offering he 
hath perfected for ever them that are being sanctified.' 
Thus the spiritual covenant promised by Jeremiah has 
been fulfilled : God's law is written in the hearts and 
minds of men ; God will no more remember their sins 
and iniquities, but will abolish all ' offering for sin,' for 
Christ is ' the fulfilment of the law.' 

The basis for this most eloquent and devout scheme 
of Jesus Christ's celestial Highpriesthoocl, and his sacri- 
ficial, atoning, and vicarious death, as presented to us 
in the Epistle to the Hebrews, whether written by 
Apollos, Barnabas, or by Paul, is not the body of the 
Scriptures or any part of them, but their systematic 
figurative interpretation. It was invented by the Essenic 
order at different times, and partly during the hundred and 
fifty years before the Christian era, when the Essenic 4 
order can be proved to have existed. This Essenic 
interpretation of Scripture had been introduced into 
non-orthodox Judaism for the purpose of connecting 
with the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms the Eastern 
and Essenic conception of an Angel-Messiah. Of this 



doctrine there is not a trace either in any of the 
Scriptures possibly composed before the deportation to 
Babylon, or in the first three Gospels. The very ancient 
and Eastern doctrine of an Angel-Messiah, (the first of 
seven Angels ?) had been applied to Gautama-Buddha, 
and so it was applied -to Jesus Christ by the Essenes 
of Egypt and of Palestine, who introduced this new 
Messianic doctrine into Essenic Judaism and Essenic 
Christianity. But although the doctrine of the Angel- 
Messiah, through the instrumentality of Magi and of 
Kenites or Eechabites, of Parthians, Pythagoreans, 
and Essenes, has been transplanted from the land of 
Buddha and countries to which Buddhism had spread, 
to the land promised to the seed of Abraham, yet no 
attempt was made in the East to develop from the Veda 
a theory of Buddha's sacrificial death. Nor do Bud- 
dhistic Scriptures ever refer to or oppose such a doc- 
trine as prevailing among Christians. This is all the 
more remarkable since vicarious sin-removing and re- 
conciling human sacrifices at the time of the spring- 
equinox, when the sun passes over the equinoctial 
point, at the Passover, can be traced back in East and 
West to pre-Abrahamitic times. 


We regard as proved, what Eusebius considered 
'highly probable,' the direct connection of Paulinic 
writings, especially of the Epistle to the Hebrews, with 
Scriptures of the Therapeutic order. The same may 
be asserted witli regard to the Septuagint and the 
writings of Philo, although here the new doctrine of the 
Angel-Messiah was only gradually revealed, and no ex- 
pectation of his incarnation was referred to. Following 
in the footsteps of Stephen and Paul, the writer of the 
Epistle to the Hebrews or Alexandrians, almost cer- 
tainly Apollos, applies the Oriental doctrine of the 


Angel-Messiah to Jesus Christ, as the end of the law 
and the bringer of a new dispensation. The non- 
Palestinian Essenes of Egypt and other countries in- 
sisted on their liberty to discard such of the injunctions 
of the Mosaic law as were derived from its literal inter- 
pretation. " Apollos had been c instructed in the way of 
the Lord ' by disciples of John, and, like the latter, he 
looked forward to Him who should come to baptize 
with the Holy Ghost, to the Angel-Messiah. Like John 
the Baptist or Essene, and like Philo, Apollos did not 
at first believe that Jesus was the Christ. But since 
Aquila and Priscilla had taught him ' the way of God 
more accurately ' than the disciples of John had done, 
he confuted in public the Jews and Essenes, i showing 
by the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ.' 

In like manner Apollos, by his Epistle to the Jewish- 
Christian part of the Alexandrian Churcr , confuted the 
Jews who were ' dull of understanding ' things ' difficult 
of interpretation.' They ought to have been ' long ago 
teachers,' but they ' again have need ' to be taught ' the 
first principles of the oracles of God.' They ' have need 
of milk, not of solid food,' they are ' unskilled ' or 6 with- 
out experience ' in the words ' of righteousness ' ; they 
are ' babes,' or, as Paul had said, 4 babes in Christ,' that 
is, not spiritual but carnal men. The readers of this 
Epistle were in the position in which Apollos had been 
when ' he knew only the baptism of John,' and when 
he had probably not even heard that there is a Holy 
Ghost. But having learnt the way of God more per- 
fectly, Apollos urges in this Epistle, the Hebrews of 
Alexandria to ' leave the elementary doctrines of Christ ' 
and to ' turn to perfection.' He teaches, that for this 
perfection the law, in its literal interpretation, had done 
6 nothing,' that with the new faith the law has ' nothing 
to do,' that it is the faith of which Paul had said that it 
should be revealed after the law, as the end of the law. 

To learn this difficult interpretation of the Scrip- 

s 2 


tures, to see that they point to the eternal and angelic 
Word of God, to the eldest Son of God, and High- 
priest of our confession, as Philo had already shown, 
and, beyond this, to understand and believe that this 
celestial Messiah or ' man from heaven,' the Angel who 
followed the Israelites, as Paul said, has become incar- 
nate in Jesus Christ, the Hebrews of Alexandria must 
be taught the more perfect doctrine of Christ, the 
deeper knowledge, the gnosis. Did the Apostle James 
acknowledge this interpretation of the law of Moses ? 




The Problem — The Herodians and the Essenes— The descent of James- 
James the Nazarite and Highpriest— The Epistle of James. 

The Problem. 

The history of James, ' the brother of the Lord,' is 
enveloped in darkness. When, and under what cir- 
cumstances ' James, the servant of God and of the Lord 
Jesus Christ,' was placed over the Apostles at Jeru- 
salem ; in what sense he was called the brother of Jesus ; 
whether it is probable that he was a Nazarite, and that 
he could enter the Holiest of the Holy ; and finally, what 
causes led to his martyrdom, when a Eechabite priest 
was standing at his side, these are generally acknow- 
ledged problems. New difficulties seem 'at first sight to 
arise from the preceding arguments, which tend to show 
that Jesus opposed the principal doctrines of the Essenes, 
with whom the Eechabites and the institution of the 
Nazarite must be connected. Yet it may be possible 
from the Essenic stand-point to throw some light on the 
life of the Prince of the Apostles, so as not to increase, 
but to diminish, the difficulties which surround it. 

The Herodians and the Essenes. 

The family of the Herods from Idumaea was descen- 
ded from the Ed omites, therefore from those non-Israelites 
who joined the armies of Nebucadnezar when he be- 
sieged Jerusalem, and who, during the Captivity, had 


spread westwards from the eastern side of the valley of 
Arabah, and had even got possession of Hebron. Then 
Edom proper or Mount Seir, of which country, Esau's 
heritage, the Hebrews never possessed a foot-breadth 
up to the time of Joshua, was taken possession of by 
the Nabathasans, descendants from Nabaioth, the first- 
born of Ishmael, who was connected with Esau, in- 
habited Edom, and married a daughter of Ishmael. The 
Nabathaeans of Arabia Petrasa seem to have been con- 
nected with the Nabat of Mesopotamia, also called 
Cuthaeans, and to have belonged to the Medo-Chaldaean 
race, to the Casdim or conquerors, to the Medes of 
Berosus, who conquered Babylon in B.C. 2458. These 
Medes may already then have introduced Magian asceti- 
cism into Mesopotamia, and the combination of non- 
Iranian asceticism, and Iranian dualism, which the 
Essenes or Assidaeans introduced into Judaism may be 
explained by the highly probable ethnic connection of 
the Essenes with the Casdim, later Chaldaeans (Nabat ?) 
of Mesopotamia. 1 This hypothesis is confirmed by the 
connection of the Essenic prophet Elkesai with the 
Mesopotamian Sabians, Mendaeans, or ' disciples of 
John,' of the Baptist or bather, the Ashai, Essai, or 

The Herocls came from a country which was alter- 
nately occupied by Edomites and Nabathasans ; the 
former of whom had become possessed during the 
Babylonian Captivity of the country to the west of the 

1 The Essenes, Kenites, or Rechabites, who came from, and whose 
* father ' was liainath, may be connected with the Jehovistic and Iranian 
non-Israelites, apparently connected with Hamath by Amos, who wrote, about 
B.C. 790, that in Juda and Samaria they would burn the bodies of Israelites, 
as the inhabitants of Jabesh-Gilead had done with the bodies of Saul and 
his son, whereupon thoy fasted seven days. (Amos vi. 1-14; 1 Sam. xxxi. 
12, 13). Already the name of the city^, Rechoboth, which Ashur (Nimrod) 
built, that is one of the four cities which formed Nineveh, must be connected 
with Rechab, and an aboriginal Hamath ' the great,' in Mesopotamia, 
(another name for Nineveh the great ?) is possible, after which Hamath on 
the Orontes was called. {Einheit der Reliyionen, i. 217 f.) 


Dead Sea, where the settlements of the Essenes were, 
where John the Baptist or Essene was born, and where he 
seems to have first baptized. The Nabathseans who 
took the place of the Edomites in the country of the 
Herods to the east of the Dead Sea, came from Meso- 
potamia, with which country we tried to connect the 
Essenes. The Nabathaeans were in possession of Petra 
at least 300 years before the commencement of the 
Christian era, and thus about 150 years before the exis- 
tence of the Essenic order is by Josephus referred to. 
Some of the Nabathaaan princes bore the name Aretas, 
and this was the name of the father-in-law of Herod 
Antipas, who possessed Damascus at the time of Paul's 
conversion to the Essenic faith. 

The probability of a sort of connection of the 

Herods with the Essenes is strengthened by the latter 

having been, as Assidaaans, the allies of the Maccabees, 

with whom the Herods were connected by Herod the 

Great's wife Mariamne. The name Hasmon, ancestor 

of the Hasmonasans or Maccabees, points to the city of 

Hashnionah, a station of the Israelites near Mount Hor, 

which was on the boundary line of Edom. As the 

Herods were connected with the land of John the 

Baptist's or the Essene's birth and first activity, so 

Chasmon, like John's father Zacharias, of the priestly 

course of Abijah or Abia, belonged to the Aaronic 

line, since according to Josephus a citizen of Jerusalem 

and a priest 4 of the sons of Joarib.' The Idumaaans were 

conquered and converted to Judaism by the Maccabiean 

John Hyrcanus in B.C. 130, according to Josephus, who 

states that since that time they regarded Jerusalem as 

their mother-city, and claimed for themselves the name 

of Jews. Considering the probable ethnical connection 

between Essenes and Maccabees, whose allies the Assi- 

dieans were earlier than B.C. 143, it may be assumed 

that the Essenes and Idumaaans were a cognate race. 

According to later Jewish tradition, Herod the Great 


was successively the servant of the Hasmonasans and 
the Romans. 1 The probability gains ground that the 
Herodians were connected with theEssenes or Assidasans, 
the allies of the Maccabees, for political reasons, if not 
also for reasons of descent. 

The Herods aimed at independence from the Romans 
as well as from the Jews. To them religion was only 
a policy, and they furthered the establishment of a 
universalist religion of the Hellenistic (Therapeutic) 
type, such as the Maccabees and the Gentile-excluding 
Essenes of Palestine had tried to prevent by a zealous 
adherence to the law. But the son of a Maccabgean 
mother, Herod Agrippa I., forsook the idolatry of his 
father, and was a strict observer of the law. Thus 
the Essenes of Judaaa could look up to him, and they 
would support him in his determine^ policy against 
those universalist Hellenists, some of whom were The- 
rapeuts, like Stephen and Paul. These particularist 
Essenes may have formed the party of the Herodians, 
which is not mentioned by Luke or by Josephus, but 
which in the Apostolic age was, like the Essenes, distin- 
guished from the Sadducean and Pharisaic party. The 
Herodians joined the Pharisees in questioning Jesus 
whether it was right to pay tribute to Cassar, and Jesus 
is recorded to have warned his hearers against the 
leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod. 

It may be asserted that the zealot Herod Agrippa I., 
of half-Maccaba3an descent, who encouraged Jews to 
take the Nazarite vow, was friendly to those Essenes 
who adhered to the law and who rejected the Gentiles 
without the law, but that he persecuted the univer- 
salist Essenes or Therapeuts, to whom Stephen and 
Paul belonged. It was during the reign of Herod 
Agrippa, probably in the first year of his terrorism and 
of the persecution which arose because of Stephen, that 
James ' the brother of the Lord ' was placed above the 

1 Jost, Geschichte des Judenthums, 319. 


Apostles at Jerusalem. It is almost certain that this 
elevation took place in the year 41, on the death of 
James the brothe r! of Zebeclee, whom Agrippa had 
caused to be beheaded, and when Peter was imprisoned. 
For when the latter, after his miraculous deliverance, 
left in the night Jerusalem ' for another place ' (Rome?), 
Peter sent a message to ' James and the brethren.' 

The Descent of James. 

Paul testifies that three years after his conversion 
he saw at Jerusalem James ' the brother of the Lord.' 
Only in two passages the word ' brother ' is in the Bible 
used in its wider sense. Abraham the Hebrew and 
Lot the Moabite are called brothers, and the same is 
said of Israel and the Edomites. In all other passages 
the word ' brother ' refers to a brother in the flesh. 
In accordance with this meaning, the Gospel after 
Matthew refers to the brothers of Jesus and to the 
sons of his mother Mary by giving their names, James, 
Joseph, Simon, and Jude, and it is added that Jesus 
had also sisters. Confirming the only possible inter- 
pretation of this passage, it is asserted as well in 
Matthew as in Luke, that Jesus was the ' firstborn ' son 
of Mary, as if she had other children ; and in the first 
three Gospels ' his mother and his brethren ' are in 
such a manner named in conjunction with Jesus, that 
his brothers must necessarily be regarded as sons of his 
mother. 1 It is therefore not necessary to dwell on the 
impossibility of the assumption that two sisters had 
the same name, which would be without precedent 
in Israelitic history. According to the Gospel after 
Matthew it is absolutely certain that Mary was the 
mother of Jesus and of other children. Yet there is a 
passage in Mark which is absolutely irreconcilable 
with the above passages and their evident meaning. 

1 Matt. xiii. 55, 56, i. 25, xii. 46, 47 ; Mark iii. 31 ; Luke ii. 7. 


Mary the mother of Jesus is distinguished from Mary 
the mother of James the Less and of Joses. 1 Two 
sisters are here supposed to have been called Mary, and 
to have inhabited the same house at Capernaum and 
Jerusalem, and yet the names of the two sons of the 
one correspond with those of the two elder sons of the 
other. It is needless to consider such absurdity. 

Discarding the tradition recorded in Mark as not 
possibly historical, and seeing that Mary was the mother 
of other children than Jesus her firstborn, it is of but 
secondary importance to enquire whether Jesus alone 
was held to be the son of Joseph the carpenter, or 
whether the brothers and sisters of Jesus had likewise 
Joseph for their father. Whilst Eusebius writes that 
James was called the brother of the Lord ' because he 
also (like Jesus) was called son of Joseph,' Epiphanius 
designates James as the son of Joseph by a previous 
marriage. By the latter statement it is implied that 
Jesus cannot have been the only son of Joseph, though 
he might possibly have been the only son of Mary. 
Both Eusebius and Epiphanius agree that James was 
the son of Joseph, and the Gospel after Matthew refers 
to a James and Joseph and Simon and Jude, as brothers, 
and to sisters of Jesus, as children of Joseph and Mary. 
We saw that an attempt was sooner or later made in 
the Gospel after Mark to distinguish the mother of 
Jesus from the mother of his brothers and sisters. For 
this there was the obvious reason that the supposed 
Angel-Messiah, like Gautama-Buddha, must be consi- 
dered to have been born of a virgin. In like manner 
an attempt was made, no doubt for the same reason, to 
undermine the tradition about James and Jesus being 
brothers in the flesh. The earliest Fathers who mystify 
the descent of James are Chrysostom (born 347) and 
Theodoret (bishop since 420), who designate him as 
son of Alphseus (Cleophas). Both originally belonged to 

1 Mark xv. 40 ; corup. Eus. H. E.,\\. 1. 


the Antiochiaii Church, which Ave have connected with 
the Essenes. Since they believed that Jesus was the 
Angel-Messiah, the Essenes probably denied that he had 
brothers and sisters, as Buddhists did about Gautama. 

The third and the fourth Gospels can be shown to 
be the principal records of Essenian tradition, and in 
them alone the name of Clopas or Cleophas occurs. 
The name of one of the two disciples of Emmaus was 
Cleophas, and the name of his companion is not given. 
Paul refers to an apparition of the risen Jesus to James 
the brother of the Lord, and as no reference is made in 
any Gospel to this apparition, whilst Luke and the 
later revisor of the third Gospel was the most likely 
Evangelist to supply this omission, we are at the outset 
led to the possibility, that James was intended to have 
been the companion of Cleophas or Alphasus by the 
composer of the narrative of the disciples of Emmaus. 
We have seen that this narrative, which Luke cannot 
have written, is certainly not historical in the form 
transmitted to us. The question has now become one 
of secondary interest whether the inventor of the narra- 
tive about the disciples of Emmaus intended to suggest 
that James was the nameless companion of Cleophas. 
The tradition transmitted by Jerome as recorded in the 
Gospel of the Hebrews indirectly confirms this narrative 
by transmitting the legend that James fasted after the 
crucifixion till the risen Jesus appeared to him and 
bade him eat. This tradition as well as the probably 
identical one about the apparition of Jesus to James 
according to Paul, is not confirmed by any Gospel- 
record, unless James was the unnamed disciple of 
Emmaus, and it is possible that the composer of this 
fictitious narrative intended to suowst this. 

Every explanation hitherto attempted of the irrecon- 
cilable statements in the Gospels about the descent of 
James, ' the brother of the Lord,' leads to forced and to 
improbable, if not impossible, assumptions. If it can be 


proved that Eusebius was right in considering it 
' highly probable ' that our Gospels, like the Pauline 
Epistles, were composed under direct Essenic influence 
and in harmony with written Essenic tradition, all 
passages which refer directly or indirectly to an exclu- 
sively supernatural birth of Jesus, whether or not in 
the writings in question he is recognised as the Angel- 
Messiah, will have to be connected with this source. 
Among these passages we reckon the isolated state- 
ment in Matthew about the virgin-born, to which 
Clement of Alexandria does not refer, as if the text did 
not then contain it, when he declares, as already 
shown, that the views of some about the virginity of 
Mary, the mother of Jesus, were not founded in fact. 
With these additions must be connected all the pas- 
sages in the Gospels which imply that another Mary 
than the mother of Jesus was the mother of his 
brothers and sisters. 

James the Nazarite and Highpriest. 

According to the Acts, the leader of the Apostles 
was Peter, and he remained in this position for some 
time after the crucifixion of Jesus, and probably till he 
was imprisoned by Herod Agrippa, we suggest as 
early as in the year 41. We saw that there are good 
reasons for assuming that in the sixth year after the 
death of Jesus, or about a year later, James took the 
place of Peter. For when this Apostle, miraculously 
liberated, left Jerusalem for another place, he requested 
the disciples whom lie had found gathered together in 
the house of Mark's mother, to inform ' James and the 
brethren ' of his escape. Whilst Peter was absent from 
Jerusalem, perhaps in Eome, 1 Paul was in Arabia, that 
is, in the East Jordan country, and they both met at 
Jerusalem after three years, that is, after the death of 

1 See Chronology of the Bible. 


Herod Agrippa L, who had ruled three years. Thus it 
becomes probable that the three years which Paul spent 
in Arabia, and Peter possibly in Koine, coincided with 
the three years' government of Herod. What happened 
at Jerusalem during the mysterious fifteen days when 
Paid abode with Peter, we know not, but Paul says 
that he also saw James, ' the Lord's brother.' In the 
same Epistle he mentions James before Cephas and 
John, when referring to their being regarded as ' pillars.' 
There can be no doubt that James was placed at the 
head of the Apostles ever since Peter's imprisonment, 
and he maintained that position for more than a quarter 
of a century, up to his martyrdom. 

We know not for what reason James the brother of 
John was beheaded, and why Peter was put into prison. 
It is quite possible, as we pointed out, that this was 
owing to their opposition to the Temple-service with its 
sacrifices, and to their frequenting exclusively the anti- 
hierarchical synagogues, as Jesus had always done. This 
example had even been followed by some of the Phari- 
sees, although the rigid maintainers of the law, the 
Sadducees, never attended the synagogue. Son of a 
Maccabsean mother, Agrippa would aim at the restora- 
tion of the Temple-services as the exclusive form of 
Jewish devotion. Herod the Great, his father, had been 
too lax in this respect, and had encouraged idolatry of 
the grossest kind. Supported by the Sadducees, who 
had persecuted Jesus and his disciples, we may safely 
assume that Agrippa I. insisted on the regular atten- 
dance of the Apostles at the Temple-services. For it 
is a recorded fact, that they were regularly • in the 
Temple at the time of prayer. Thus they ceased to 
follow the example of their Master. Although the 
Apostles were not scattered during the persecution 
which arose because of Stephen, they were in fact in- 
cluded in this persecution ; but it seems to have been 
soon stopped for two reasons, because the second 


Agrippa was more friendly to them, and because they 
regularly attended the Temple-services, which Jesus 
had never done. This is what all Nazarites did ; and 
as Nazarite James, the brother of Jesus, could offer 
to Agrippa L, the reported friend of the Nazarites, 
every guarantee which he must have been desirous to 

The traditions respecting James which have been 
transmitted by Hegesippus, the first Jewish -Christian, 
and possibly Essenic-Christian Church-historian, if we 
could safely regard them all as historical, would be 
important, because his parents were contemporaries of 
the Prince of the Apostles, and because, as Eusebius 
says, Hegesippus stood nearest to the days of the Apos- 
tles. According to this tradition James had been called 
the Just or Zadik ' from the time of the Lord to our 
own days, . . he was holy from his mother's 
womb, he drank not wine or strong drink, nor did he 
eat animal food ; a razor came not upon his head, he 
did not anoint himself with oil, he did not use the bath; 
he alone might go into the holy place, for he wore no 
woollen clothes but linen ; and alone he used to go into 
the Temple, and there he was commonly found upon his 
knees, praying for forgiveness for the people, so that his 
knees grew dry and thin (hard ?) like a camel's, from 
his constantly bending them in prayer, and entreating 
forgiveness for the people.' l We shall point out why 
James ' alone ' went into the Holiest of the Holy, 
whilst, contrary to the custom of his brother Jesus, 
all the Apostles regularly attended the daily services in 
the Temple. We may regard these statements as equally 
historical, and as throwing light on the early relations 
between Judaism and Christianity. 

Of the remaining account it is here sufficient to 
state that the martyrdom of James in the presence of 
' one of the priests of the house of Eechab,' (priests of 

1 Eus. H. E. ii. 23. 


the Essenes), took place in consequence of his having 
declared in the Temple, that ' Jesus the Son of Man sits 
in heaven on the right hand of great power, and will 
come on the clouds of heaven.' By this declaration, if 
he made it, James proclaimed the Essenic and Paulinic 
faith in his brother Jesus as the Angel-Messiah. This 
Essenic Christianity is said to have been proclaimed 
openly in the Temple by James at the time of the 
Passover, immediately before the Eomans laid siege to 
Jerusalem. Hegesippus states that ' many were con- 
vinced, and gave glory on the testimony of James, 
crying Hosannah to the Son of David.' Whereupon the 
Scribes and Pharisees stoned James to death. 

Since Hegesippus does not censure the conduct of 
James in proclaiming the Essenic and Eechabite doc- 
trine of the Angel-Messiah, applied to Jesus, as Stephen 
and Paul had done, Ave have sufficient reason to 
regard Hegesippus as an Essenic or Paulinic Christian, 
and to doubt his transmitted testimony that James be- 
lieved his brother Jesus to have been an incarnate 
Angel. But there is no reason to doubt that some of 
the Eechabites, Nazarites like James, would sympathise 
with his death, though he had not proclaimed Jesus as 
the Angel-Messiah, which Hegesippus says he did, 
almost in the very words of Stephen. If Hegesippus 
believed in Jesus as the Angel-Messiah, he would see 
the importance of attributing that doctrine to James 
the brother of Jesus, and of describing him as stoned 
to death, like Stephen, as a supposed blasphemer. 

Discarding this tradition of Hegesippus, it may be 
regarded as not improbable that James was a Nazarite 
for life, and thus stood in near relation to the Essenes, 
with whom we must connect the Eechabites. Accord- 
ing to their descent both James and Jesus were connec- 
ted with the naturalised strangers in Israel, with the 
Eechabites and Kenites, and thus almost certainly with 
the Essenes, who were probably descendants of the 


Medo-Chaldaeans. Jesus opposed the principal doctrines 
of the Essenes, especially that about the Angel-Messiah. 
He was an Essenic reformer, and not a Nazarite. The 
Pharisees were Iranians, like the Essenes, Eechabites, 
and Kenites, according to our ethnic scheme. If so, the 
Pharisees knew the mixed Indian and Iranian or Magian 
doctrines which the Essenes propounded, as well as 
those purer doctrines of the East-Iranians or of 
Zoroaster, which Jesus proclaimed by word and deed. 
The condemnation of Jesus, not by the Sadducees but 
by the Pharisees, would be thus accounted for. 

The connection between Eechabites or Kenites and 
Essenes, apart from their probably cognate descent, 
enables us to consider as possibly historical the state- 
ment of Hegesippus, according to which he could, like 
a Highpriest, enter the Holiest of the Holy. This 
account is confirmed by Epiphanius, who states, on the 
authority of Clement, Eusebius, and others, that James 
' the son of Joseph ' was permitted to wear on his fore- 
head the golden plate with the words ' Holiness to the 
Lord,' or ' Holy Jehovah.' This statement is again con- 
firmed by the tradition transmitted by Polycrates and 
credited by Eusebius, that also the Apostle John, son 
of Zebedee, possessed this privilege of the Aaronites. 
The same tradition refers to the unnatural death of the 
two sons of Zebedee, that of John being also testified by 
a recently found fragment of Papias, probably the 
bishop of Hierapolis. 1 The two remarkable statements 
may therefore be regarded as probably historical, that 
James could enter the Holiest of the Holy, like a High- 
priest, and that he possessed also the Highpriestly and 
Aaronic privilege of wearing the golden plate or Petalon 
described by Josephus, who says that the identical one 
made in the times of Moses existed at his time. It may 
be possible from the Essenic or Eechabite point of view 

1 Epipb. liar. xxix. 4, lxxviii. 14 ; Eus. H. E. v. 24; comp. Scholten, 
Der Apostel Johannes ; Holtzmanu, Bibel-Lexikon, iii. 38o. 


to throw some new light on the highpriestly character 
attributed to the Prince of the Apostles. 

It is necessary to repeat what we have pointed out 
about the two Highpriests in Israel and about their 
probable connection with the two Aaronic lines, if not 
with the political parties of the Sadducees and the Pha- 
risees, the latter of which was not so ancient as the 
party of the Essenes or Eechabites. 

Jeremiah had in the Name of God promised to 
the Eechabites or strangers in Israel an uninterrupted 
standing before the Lord, that is, a succession of High- 
priests of the sons of Eechab, who should officiate in 
the Holiest of the Holy. At the time of the Eeturn from 
Babylon Ezechiel complains, that Israel has brought 
into God's sanctuary strangers uncircumcised in heart 
and in the flesh, to be in God's sanctuary 'to pollute it, 
even my house when ye offer my bread, the fat and 
the blood.' 1 This can only refer to a Highpriest repre- 
senting the uncircumcised stranger in the Holiest of the 
Holy, in harmony with the prophecy of Jeremiah, the 
fulfilment of which Ezechiel clearly condemns in the 
Name of the same God who had commanded Jeremiah 
to make that solemn promise. Ezechiel seems to imply 
that the junior Aaronic line of Ithamar had been 
admitted to represent the Highpriesthoocl of the 
naturalised stranger in Israel, of the Ger, who, as dis- 
tinguished from the foreigner or Nokhri, was admitted, 
like the Hebrew, to the Temple-services. For Ezechiel 
states that the sons of Zadoc only, who belonged to 
the elder Aaronic line of Eleazar, and who had stood 
by David during Absalom's rebellion, that they shall 
' stand before ' God, that is, appear as Highpriests 
in the Holiest of the Holy. At the time of Zerubbabel, 
when Ezechiel wrote, the prophet Zechariah approved 
in the Name of God everything that was done by Zerub- 

1 Jer. xxxv. 18, 11 ; Ezek. xliv. 7-31 ; Einh. der Eel. i. 288-312, 



babel and Joshua. 1 The latter may have belonged to 
the Aaronic line of Ithamar, which name is a compound 
of Jah, and Thamar ' the stranger,' according to Philo. 
• The remarkable omission of the generations of the 
line of Ithamar in the Book of Chronicles, whilst those 
of the line of Eleazar are twice mentioned, can hardly 
be otherwise explained than by the assumption that 
these two lines of Aaronites represented respectively 
the ethnic dualism in Israel, the Hebrew and the 
non-Hebrew or the stranger, who seems to have been 
uncircumcised from the statement made by Ezechiel 
about uncircumcised Highpriests in the Holiest of the 
Holy. This dualism is in so far confirmed by Scripture- 
accounts, as the Aaronites of the elder line had their pos- 
sessions exclusively in Benjamin, the junior line exclu- 
sively in Juda, with which tribe the Kenites or Eecha- 
bites were united ever since the time of Joshua. The 
Kenites of Jethro had been invited by Moses to join 
the ' mixed multitude ' which went out of Egypt, and 
according to the Book of Chronicles both Eleazar and 
Ithamar 'executed the priest's office.' Again, in the 
time of Saul, the Benjamite, the elder line sided with 
him, the younger line with David ; and if Abiathar had 
not escaped from the massacre at Nob, all the members 
of the line of Ithamar would have been killed. David 
made peace between the apparently rival Aaronic lines 
by establishing the double Highpriesthood of Abiathar 
and Zadok. 

Such a double Highpriesthood seems to have been 
appointed after the Eeturn from Babylon. For at that 
time Ezechiel complained of the uncircumcised High- 
priest in the Holiest of the Holy, and Zechariah de- 
scribes Joshua and Satan or the adversary, as if the 
second Highpriest, standing before the Lord in the 

1 We have already referred to Joshua's having probably composed the 
110th Psalm, which seems to refer to Jeremiah's promise to the Rechabites, 
perhaps first fulfilled by Joshua's Highpriesthood, 


Holiest of the Holy. In the time immediately preceding 
the accession of James to the leadership of the Apostles, 
the double Highpriesthood is testified by the Gospel- 
records. Luke mentions Annas and Caiaphas as con- 
temporaneous Highpriests, and he connects Annas as well 
as Caiaphas with others who were ' of the kindred of the 
high priest.' It cannot be doubted that among these a 
second bore the title of Highpriest, since ' the High- 
priests ' are said to have demanded the crucifixion of 
Jesus. Before the deportation to Babylon Zephaniah 
was joined as ' second priest ' to Seraiah, ' the first 
priest,' both of whom were slain at Kiblah. We are 
justified in assuming that either Caiaphas or Annas 
was in a similar sense the second Highpriest, who, accord- 
ing to Eabbinical traditions, was the Sagan. The po- 
sition of James at the head of the Apostles is described 
as one similar to that of the Highpriest. As Highpriest 
James would have the privilege of entering the Holiest of 
the Holy and of wearing the Aaronic gold plate on his 
forehead. 1 Assuming that James really had these pri- 
vileges, we should be driven to the further assumption 
that the family of Joseph, the father of Jesus and James, 
was one of those from the members of which the High- 
priests were chosen. We should have to assume the 
same about the family of Zebeclee. 

If the brother of Jesus and Prince of the Apostles, 
whose life bridges over almost the entire Apostolic 
period, not only went with the other Apostles to the 
Temple at the hour of prayer, contrary to the custom 
of Jesus, but if James also entered the Holiest of the 
Holy with the Aaronic mark on his forehead, whether 
or not he belonged to one of the Highpriestly families, 
an important connection of the first Christian Bishop 
with the Jewish Highpriesthood, the amalgamation 
of both institutions would thereby be confirmed. 

1 Luke iii. 2 ; Acts iv. 6 ; John xviii. 15, 16; comp. 2 Kings xy. 18; 
xxiii. 4: Acts xxi. 17, 18: xxiii. 2, 5. 

T 2 


The Epistle of James. 

Two arguments have been raised against the James 
of this Epistle being the first Christian Bishop. The 
statement of Hegesippus is not relied upon, that ' im- 
mediately ' after the martyrdom of James ' Vespasian 
invaded and took Judaea,' and the year 62 is preferred 
for his martyrdom on the strength of a passage in 
Josephus, although it is on good grounds regarded as a 
late interpolation. Since this Epistle unmistakably re- 
fers to the Epistle to the Hebrews and to the Apocalypse 
of the year 68-69, this Epistle could not have been 
written by ' the brother of the Lord ' if he died in 62. 
This conclusion has been supported by the assumption 
that the statement of the poor being drawn before the 
judgment seats by the rich refers to a general persecu- 
tion of Christians by those rich who were outside of 
Christianity, by the Eomans, which cannot be proved to 
have taken place before Trajan. 1 We do not accept 
either argument, and regard the Apostle James as the 
author of this Epistle. 

Indirectly connected with the Essenes as a Nazarite, 
though not an actual member of the Essenic body in 
Palestine, James defends the strict keeping of the Law, 
including the exclusion of Gentiles, of whose admission 
he says nothing, against the figurative interpretation of 
the Law, as practised by the Essenes or Therapeuts of 
Egypt, and against their illegal principle of universality. 
A regard for peace, and for the high position gained by 
Paul, causes James not to mention Paul by name, but 
his principal doctrines are unsparingly opposed. Paul 
having referred to the temptation to commit idolatry, 
without denouncing the eating of things sacrificed to 
idols, and having expressed the glory of Christians in 
6 tribulations,' James also advises the brethren to count 
it all joy when they fall ' into divers temptations,' yet 
points not, like Paul, to ' hope,' but to the ' perfect 

1 Hilgenfeld, I.e., 520 542, 


work.' The temptations come from within, and they 
can be resisted. For < of his own will ' the Father of 
Lights, the source of every good and perfect gift, has 
begotten < us,' the Israel of the twelve tribes, including 
the Christians as in the Apocalypse, ' with the word of 
truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruit of his 
creatures.' * 

Already Moses had said that ' the Word ' is in the 
Israelite that he may do it ; and referring to this passage, 
or to a ' Scripture ' not transmitted to us, James writes : 
' The Spirit that he placed in us zealously (urgingly) 
desireth us,' prompts us, or demands of us. It is the 
6 Name ' or Spirit, or Word of God, which is in the 
Israelite as in the Angel of the Lord. Thus Israel, ' the 
firstborn of nations,' was always destined to be a kind 
of firstfruit of God's creatures. But Paul had regarded 
this passage in the Mosaic Scriptures as a prophecy that 
Jesus would be ' raised from the dead ' as the ' end of 
the law,' as the Son of God ' according to the spirit of 
holiness,' as the restorer of the Spirit or Word of God, 
through whose death came ' the free gift ' of God, ' the 
promised Spirit through faith'. That faith should be 
revealed after the law, which latter has nothing to do 
with faith. The law cannot justify, and enables man to 
serve only ' in the oldness of the letter,' not ' in the new- 
ness of the Spirit,' or in the new created being of the 
Spirit, ' as a new creature.' The restorer of the Spirit of 
God, which was not ' always to strive with man,' has been 
raised from the dead as ' the firstfruits of them that 
sleep.' This new doctrine, connected by Paul with the 
type of the firstling sheaf and thus with the resurrection 
of Jesus as the first fruits on ' the third day according 
to the Scriptures,' James opposes by his doctrine of ' the 
firstfruit of God's creatures.' Thus he denies the new dis- 
pensation of Paul's Christianity, together with any theory 
about the visible resurrection of Jesus, on which, as on 

1 James i. 2-17; 1 Cor. x. 13; Rom. v. 3-5; James i. 17, 18. 


the atonement, the Epistle observes a mysterious silence. 
Not the sacrificial death of a crucified Angel-Messiah, 
but the implanted, or ' the engrafted Word,' of which 
Moses spoke as then already at work in Israel, if not in 
mankind, is able to ' save ' the soul. 1 

' The word of truth,' which God has implanted in 
Israel alone, or, at least, of which only Israel is con- 
scious, cannot make man a first fruit of God's creatures 
unless that word is done as well as heard. That inner 
voice, coining from without, produces conscience, the ark 
in which ' the law of liberty ' has been deposited, which 
shall judge the elect. Man is to be ' a doer of work,' 
and if he is prompted to do it by the Wisdom from 
above, he will be ' blessed in his deed.' No ' faith ' can 
save him. ' A man may say : Thou (Paul) hast faith, 
and I have works, show me thy faith without works, 
and I will show thee faith from my works.' Having 
shown that ' faith without works is dead,' and taking 
no cognisance of Paul's recommending ' faith which 
worketh by love,' James opposes Paul's scriptural au- 
thority for his doctrine of justification by faith. Paul 
had said that faithful Abraham's belief in God, not any 
work of his, ' was reckoned to him for righteousness.' 
For the works of the law placed man ' under a curse,' 
which continued till ' Christ redeemed us from the curse 
of the law, having become a curse for us,' which was 
necessary ' that we might receive the promised Spirit 
through faith.' Apollos had followed in the same strain, 
and designated the offering of Isaac, and Eahab's recep- 
tion of the spies as a deed prompted by faith. But 
James insists that Abraham was 'justified by works 
when lie offered Isaac,' and so, likewise Eahab, * when 
she received the messengers and thrust them forth 
another way.' The Epistle of James is a protest against 
the Paulinic doctrine, that it is impossible to be ' under 

1 Dent. xxx. 11-20 ; Rom. x. 4-21 ; Gal. iii. 13, 14 ; vi. 15, 2 Cor. 
v. 17 ; 1 Cor. xv. 4, 20. 


the law ' and yet to be ' led by the Spirit.' The Prince 
of the Apostles denies that the Spirit of God has not 
been in Israel till Christ's death restored it to the faith- 
ful in mankind. The great lawgiver had said that the 
Word is in man that he may do it. 1 

James implies that the implanted 6 Word,' the real 
Saviour, is identical with the ' Wisdom ' which ' de- 
scends from above,' as also with the ' Spirit ' which God 
made to dwell in us. Thus the Apostle clearly opposes 
Paid's doctrine that the Word of God, which already 
Philo designated as a premundane person and second 
Deity, that ' the man from heaven,' the Angel of God 
who had followed the Israelites, had become incarnate 
in Jesus. Yet he calls him ' our Lord Jesus Christ, the 
Lord of glory.' Standing on the rock of Peter's con- 
fession, James regards his brother as the man whom 
God has anointed or made Christ ' with the Holy Ghost 
and with power,' and in this sense as 4 the Son of the 
living God.' Not the Lord Jesus Christ, but ' the Lord ' 
and ' the Judge,' God, was expected soon to come.' 2 

The Chrestus-party among the Jews in Eome, to 
which Simon Magus the ' Christian ' seems to have be- 
longed, shows that the name of Christians, which had 
originated in Antioch , the centre of Simon's activity, was 
used soon after the accession of James to the Apostle- 
ship. Yet it is doubtful whether he acknowledges 
even indirectly the designation of the disciples of Jesus 
as Christians, when he refers to that ' beautiful name ' 
by which the scattered Israelites are called, whom he 
addresses, and among whom he includes the disciples 
of Jesus Christ. It is customary to connect this passage 
with the Name of God by which Israel was called. 3 
Even if this could be proved, it might be explained by 
the ' Name ' as the Spirit or Word of God, which is in 

1 Rom. iv. ; Gal. iii. ; comp. Hebrews x. 8-10, 17-31 ; James ii. 

2 James i. 1 ; ii. 1 ; v. 7-11. 

3 Deut. xxviii. 10 ; 2 Chron. vii. 17 ; Jer. xiv. 9, xv. 16 ; Am. ix. 12. 


the Angel and in tlie Israelites. But James seems to 
refer to the name of ' brethren,' as which he regards all 
Israelites, rich or poor, whether Hebrews or Grecians, 
whether disciples of Jesus or not. The poor or the 
Ebionite was an early designation of the followers of 
Jesus, some of whom continued in the fourth century 
to call themselves Nazaraeans, and did not acknow- 
ledge Paul. The rich, wearing gay clothing, were 
admitted to better seats in the ' synagogue ' than the 
poor ; they were despised, and yet Jesus had preached 
the Gospel to the poor. 

The Epistle which Peter addressed to James from 
Eome, according to the Clementine Homilies, corresponds 
with the injunction in the Eecognitions, not to accept 
any teacher who had not brought a testimonial from 
James. ' The chief of the Jews ' at Eome, who con- 
nected Paul with ' a sect everywhere spoken against ' 
(the Essenes), declared that they had not received 
6 letters out of Judaea concerning him.' The additional 
statement, that none of the brethren that came had 
showed or spoken ' any harm ' of him, is a contradic- 
tion to what precedes it, and must be regarded as a later 
addition, made in harmony with the fundamental prin- 
ciple of the Acts, the non-recognition of two antagonis- 
tic parties in the early Church. It is hardly a chance- 
coincidence that James in his Epistle complains that 
there were ' many teachers ' in Israel, wise men ' en- 
dowed with knowledge,' but not with ' meekness,' who 
had ' bitter envying and ribaldry ' in their heart, who 
boasted and lied ' against the truth,' whose wisdom de- 
scends not from above, and who did not ' work peace.' 
These teachers, even if authorised by James, as Paul 
had been by the Twelve, to preach among the scattered 
tribes of Israel, had not carried out their mission as 
James wished. Paul makes a similar charge. 1 

The acknowledged Essenic colouring of this Epistle 

1 James Hi. 1, 13-18 ; Recog. iv. 35; Phil. i. 15-18. 


is shown by James's recommendation to be ' swift to 
hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath,' by his prohibition 
of swearing, his warning against riches, and against 
the blemishing influences of ' the world.' Although 
only connected with the Essenic system as a Naza- 
rite, yet, like the Essenes, James was a stranger in 
Israel, and must have known the Essenic-Buddhistic 
tradition. It cannot possibly be a mere chance-coinci- 
dence that James refers to ' the wheel of birth,' identical 
with the Buddhistic expression of ' the wheel of life and 
death,' that is, the cycle of births and deaths, or the 
soul's transmigrations. 1 James was by the Initiated un- 
derstood to say, that the tongue, set on fire by hell, 
inflames the whole body, even of future generations. 

The Epistle of James proves, that up to the time of 
Judaea's invasion by the Eomans, the chief of the Apos- 
tles, probably the Jewish Highpriest, and first Christian 
Bishop, recognised no difference between the Jews and 
the followers of Jesus, and did not acknowledge the 
cardinal doctrines of Paul, which we have connected 
with those of the Essenic, universalist, and law-under- 
mining Therapeuts. 

In what connection stood the Essenic tradition to 
the Gnosis of the Apostolic and of the after-Apostolic 

1 James iii. 6 ; comp. p. 34 n. 2 ; The wheel, Gilgnl in Hebrew and in 
Chaldee, is in the Talmud used : 1) in connection with the resurrection of 
Jews dying in foreign lands, like Jacob (Gen. xlvii. 30), which is connected 
with the motion of a subterranean wheel, an evidently Eastern conception ; 
2) when discussing the question whether the planets rotate round their 
axis or round the fixed stars ; 3) as a figurative expression of the changes 
of man's destiny. Kelhubot, 111 ; Pesachim, 94 ; Sabbath, 151. (Commu- 
nicated by Dr. Leopold Seligmann.) 



Essenic Scriptures — Retrospect. 

Essenic Scriptures. 

The deeper knowledge or Gnosis of the Essenes, their 
secret tradition of Eastern origin, which they connected 
with the Scriptures of Moses by a figurative interpre- 
tation of the latter, has been generally accepted by 
the Targnmim, but rejected in essential points by the 
Talmud. Applied to Jesus, this gnosis was promulgated 
by Stephen, Paul, and Apollos, in the universalist or 
Therapeutic form. Paul opposes in his Epistle to the 
Colossians the gnosis of the separatist Essenes, with 
their aristocratic initiation, their asceticism, and their 
doctrine of more than One Angelic mediator. ' All the 
fulness ' dwelt by God's pleasure in the incarnate Word 
of God, the Angel who followed the Israelites, and in 
whom is the Name, Spirit, or Word of God. He is 'the 
Christ, even Jesus the Lord,' whom Paul does not con- 
nect with other Arch-Angels, as was done a few years 
later in the Apocalypse of 'John.' It has been sa- 
gaciously suggested by a high authority that the above 
cited words of Paul may point ' to the distinction of the 
heavenly Christ from the earthly Jesus,' which doctrine 
avjis taught by Cerinthus, his junior contemporary. 1 

Paul and Apollos regarded the deeper knowledge or 
gnosis as eternally existing in heaven, as known to, but 
hidden by Moses, and as first fully revealed by the 
preachers of ' the hidden wisdom,' under the especial 

1 Bishop Lightfoot, Colossians (ii. 6), p. 112. 


guidance of Jesus Christ, the Angel-Messiah or Wisdom 
of God who had sent all the prophets. If the doctrine 
of the Angel-Messiah was the starting-point of the 
gnosis, and if Jesus has not recognised the doctrine of 
the Angel-Messiah, than he must be regarded as having 
opposed the gnosis, which was supposed to have been 
revealed by the Angel-Messiah. From this it follows, 
that if Jesus made known mysteries to his disciples, 
though he spoke to the people only in parables, 
suggesting but not defining the truth, the * mysteries of 
the kingdom of heaven,' made known by him to the 
Twelve only, cannot have referred to the doctrine of 
the Angel-Messiah. The silence on this doctrine in all 
Scriptures of the Old Testament possibly written before 
the Exile, and in the first three Gospels, leaves no doubt 
as to the relation of Jesus to the Essenic gnosis, even to 
that form of it which was preached by Paul and Apollos. 
The Booh of Daniel. — We regard as proved that this 
Scripture, as transmitted to us, was not completed 
before the times of the Maccabees, probably in B.C. 164, 
whose allies, the Assida3ans, we have connected with the 
Essenes and thus with the Eechabites, who were ex- 
ported with other Israelites to Babylon. The Scriptures 
distinguish two Daniels, if not three: the Daniel to 
whom Ezechiel refers at the time when Jerusalem was 
besieged (588—584) ; the prophet Daniel who was ex- 
ported to Babylon ; and Daniel the priest of the line 
of Ithamar, who in 515 signed the covenant at Jerusa- 
lem. 1 But if the mission of Ezra took place in the reign 
of the ' Artaxerxus ' Darius Hystaspes, Daniel the priest 
can have been identical with Daniel the prophet. This 
identity is asserted by the Septuagint and by the Moham- 
medan tradition, according to which Daniel the prophet 
returned to Judaea, and it is indirectly implied by the 
Book of Daniel, in which the three companions of Daniel 

1 The Ghrmology of the Bible, 61-6G. 


are mentioned among those who returned to Jerusalem. 
Indeed, they could be all four alive in 520 if they had 
been exported to Babylon in 588, or even in the year 
608, the third year of Jehoiakim. Then no siege of Jeru- 
salem by Nebucadnezar, whether Crownprince or King, 
can be proved to have taken place, whilst statements 
in the Book of Jeremiah seem to exclude the possibility 
of such a siege. 1 

Daniel the prophet was exported to Babylonia con- 
temporaneously with the Eechabites, who shared the 
captivity of the Hebrews, according to the super- 
scription of the 71st Psalm in the Septuagint version, 
where the Psalm is designated as dedicated to David of 
(by) the sons of Jonadab *' the first of the captives.' 
The Targum confirms this. These Eechabites or Kenites, 
who had declared to Jeremiah that they had always 
been strangers or non-Hebrews in Israel, and to whom 
a priesthood for ever had been promised, we have tried 
to connect with the Medo-Chalda3ans, the Chasdim or 
conquerors, who conquered Mesoj)otamia about 500 
years before Abraham's birth. It is in the language 
and wisdom of these Iranian Chalda3ans, whom the 
Book of Daniel identifies with the Magi, or priests of 
the Medes, that young Daniel was brought up. The 
highly probable connection of Eechabites and Essenes, 
if not their identity, increases the importance of the 
probable non-Hebrew and Davidic descent of Daniel the 
prophet, who bore the name of David's second son, 
of his initiation, after three years of ascetic discipline, 
into the mysteries of the Chaldeans or Magi, and of his 
being set over all the wise men of Babylon. The con- 
nection between Daniel and the Magi, and between 
Essenian and Magian rites renders it highly probable 
that the Eechabites, Assidasans and Essenes after the 
Captivity transmitted the Eastern wisdom of which 

1 Jer. xxxvi. 1, 9, 29; comp. xxv. 1, 2, and our further remarks. 


Daniel had been the principal organ during the Cap- 
tivity. This connection of Daniel with the Essenes is con- 
firmed by the doctrinal contents of the Book of Daniel. 

We saw that the Essenes must at all times have 
expected an Angel-Messiah, which doctrine, contained 
in the Book of Daniel, cannot be proved by any ancient 
Scripture to have prevailed in Israel. As presumably 
among the Essenes, so in the Book of Daniel Ave find a 
fully developed doctrine of Angels, of which there is no 
trace in Scriptures possibly composed before the Exile. 
The world of Angels, which the Essenes and all Gnostics 
separated by a great gulf from the material or terres- 
trial world, is presided over by a not stated number of 
watchers or saints, whose decrees are those of God. As 
there are seven archangels in the Book of Tobiah, so 
we may assume a similar number in the Book of Daniel, 
although only Gabriel and Michael are named. Thus 
we are led to connect the chief angels in the Book of 
Daniel with the seven watchers or Amshaspands of the 
Persians. The name Gabriel means ' man of God,' and 
his office is to be God's representative, just as Serosh 
was the vicar of Ormuzd, taking his place as the first 
of the seven Amshaspands, probably because the God 
of light takes himself no part in the fight against the 
God of darkness. In the New Testament Gabriel an- 
nounces the Messiah. 1 

Daniel's recorded vision about the universal rule of 
a celestial or Angel-Messiah following upon four succes- 
sive Empires, symbolised by beasts, cannot be entirely 
separated from the knowledge which Daniel had 
acquired by his initiation in Chaldaean wisdom. The 
Medo-Chaldees or Magi over whom Daniel was placed, 
represented the Iranian tradition as promulgated in the 
West, in part perhaps ever since the Median conquest 
of Babylon in pre-Abrahamitic times. We saw that 

1 Dan. iv. 14, 21 ; vii. ; Tob. xii. 15 ; Luke i. 19, 26. 


these Medes probably introduced into the West the very 
ancient Eastern tradition of an Angel-Messiah and vicar 
of God, since the ancient Babylonians knew about a 
Divine Messenger who would distribute good among 
men, as his name Silik-mulu-dug implies. Like the fire- 
bringer Agni-Matarisvan of the ancient Indians, this 
Mesopotamian Angel-Messiah was connected with the 
fire-sticks. We may safely assume, that the rule of 
this Messiah was by the Medo-Chalclseans of Mesopo- 
tamia connected, if not identified, with the rule of the 
Divine Messenger and mediator Sraosha or Serosh, 
which was expected to follow on Ormuzd's rule of 3,000 
years and Ahriman's rule of 3,000 years, as the last 
1,000 years, thus concluding the 7,000 years. 

The doctrine of this Messianic Millennium expected 
to be brought about by a celestial messenger, and which 
would lead to the resurrection of the dead, has been 
more fully described and possibly developed in the 
Bundehesh and other writings of the time of the Sassa- 
nides, long after B.C. 216. The Iranian traditions were 
recast under the Sassanides, as this had been done much 
earlier by Ezra with the Hebrew traditions. In both 
cases it would be as unreasonable to attempt to draw a 
line of demarcation between the old and the new, as to 
deny the probability of a secret tradition as the source 
of such development. But as regards the Iranian sym- 
bolism of the alternate rule of light and darkness, of 
Ormuzd, Oromasdes or Ahura-Masda, and of Ahriman, 
Areimanios or Angromainjus, we hope to have proved 
by an astronomical interpretation, and thus by a locali- 
sation of this and of similar myths, that these Eastern 
conceptions are more ancient than the commencement 
of Egyptian history. 1 

The parallel between Serosh the vicar of Ormuzd, 
and Eros the vicar of Zeus, confirms the identity of 

1 See Chapter ITT, 54 f. ; Die Plejaden, 48-85. 


Zeus and Ormuzd, first observed by Eudoxus, and Aris- 
toteles, born B.C. 384. We may now safely assert, that 
the Magian tradition transmitted by Theopompus of 
Chios, born about B.C. 378, is more ancient than the 
time of Nebucadnezar, according to which a Millennium 
will precede the resurrection of the dead. Directly 
connected with the statements of Theopompus are those 
in the Bundehesh and other writings, according to 
which the time of the resurrection will be preceded by 
four cosmical periods, which are also designated as 
four .kingdoms of gold, silver, steel, and iron. 

In the Bahman Yesht, first cited by Spiegel, it is 
written : 'As revealed in the Ctutgar : Zertusht de- 
manded from Ormuzd immortality ; then Ormuzd 
showed to Zertusht the omniscient wisdom ; he then 
saw a tree with such a root, that four trees had sprung 
up from it, a golden one, a silver one, one of steel, and 
one of iron.' Zoroaster is then told by revelation, that 
the tree with one root, the tree of knowledge, * is the 
world,' and that the four trees are ' the four times that 
shall come.' The golden time is that of Zoroaster (or of 
king Vistaspa) ; the silver tree is the kingdom of Arta- 
shir ; that of steel, the kingdom of the son of Kobat ; 
the iron tree is the wicked dominion of the Devs, or 
evil spirits. Then comes the kingdom of Serosh, Srao- 
sha, Sraoshyank, literally ' the helper,' or Saviour, also 
called the Holy One and the Victorious. According to 
later traditions several prophets were to be his forerun- 
ners. With this tradition Spiegel has connected, on 
the strength of remarkable parallels which cannot be 
casual, the Buddhist expectation, still maintained, of 
another Buddha, of Maitreya, the son of love (like 
Eros) who shall take up the lost thread of Buddha's 
doctrine, who shall take of the words of Buddha and 
make known the truth. 1 Thus it is indirectly proved 

1 Diop-. Laert. prooem. 8 ; Spiegel, Zeitschrift d. M, G. iii. 467 ; vi. 


that the Iranian symbolism and prophecy of four 
Empires preceding the Messianic Millennium is more 
ancient than Gautama-Buddha and his contemporary 
Cyrus. 1 

Whether the prophet Daniel returned to Judaea or 
not, the evidently parallel organisation of the Eabbis 
and their three classes with the Magi and their three 
classes, as existing when Daniel was set over them, 
renders it almost certain, that the Magian tradition 
about a future Angel-Messiah and his rule of a thousand 
years was introduced by some of the returning Jews 
into Palestine. We have shown in another place that 
the Chronology of the Bible has been connected, per- 
haps by Ezra, with a scheme of 7,000 years, ending with 
the Messianic Millennium. The year of the destruction 
of the temple by Nebucadnezar's general, in B.C. 586, 
was made the starting-point of the second cycle of 70 
jubilees or 3,500 years, which two periods made up the 
7,000 years, supposed to have been decreed as the limi- 
tation of the earth's existence. According to this scheme, 
the first 70 jubilees commenced with the creation of 
Adam, seventy years after the creation of heaven and 
earth, and they ended B.C. 586. The fulfilment of se- 
venty years' exile, recorded as a prophecy of Jeremiah, 
had been accurately accomplished in the year 516, 
when the Second Temple was consecrated, if they were 
reckoned from the destruction of the Temple in 586. 
But this fulfilment had been ushered in by the permis- 
sion to return in 536, in the fiftieth or jubilee year. 

78 f. ; Acad, der Wissen. vi. 89 f. ; Avesta, 32-38, 244 ; Duncker, I c. 

ii. 369 f. ; Delitzsch, in Herzog, I. c. * Daniel.' 

1 Professor Beal points out the coincidence in the epithets ' the man 
greatly beloved,' or ' much beloved ' (literally coveted) in Dan. ix. 23 ; x. 11, 
19, with Piyattissa's (Priyadassi or Priyadosa), ' the beloved.' Mr. Thomas 
(I. c. 54) dwells on the importance of the Bhabra Inscription rejecting the 
title still used in earlier inscriptions of Asoka : Devanampiyo or ' beloved of 
the gods.' If Buddha prayed to the highest Spirit, Isvara Deva, or to 
Abidha, the Sun God, Asoka after his conversion from Jainism to Buddhism 
would object to tbis polytheistic title on that ground. 


Seventy years were enlarged to a second set of seventy 
jubilees, or 3,500 years, from B.C. 586 to 1914 a.d., 
the last twenty jubilees forming a parallel to the last 
twenty years of Jeremiah's seventy years. Thus the 
20x50 years, the Millennium, was placed a.d. 1914- 
2914. l This scheme cannot have been invented before 
B.C. 516. We shall see that the Eevelation of ' John ' 
supplements the Book of Daniel, and refers to the Mil- 

The Book of Daniel follows the oriental tradition 
about the four monarchies, in placing the kingdom 
of the celestial Messiah in the position of that of Serosh, 
the first of seven angels, and vicar of the highest God. 
This Iranian scheme is reproduced in various forms 
in the Book of Daniel, where the four eras are applied 
to that of four successive kingdoms, beginning with that 
of Nebucadnezar and ending with that of Alexander, 
upon which the Messianic kingdom was expected to 
follow. The first form in which the Eastern tradition 
has been moulded, by revelation or not, is a dream 
which Nebucadnezar is said to have had, and which 
Daniel was able to relate as if he himself had dreamt 
it. The king had seen a great image, the head of 
which was gold (Nebucadnezar), breast and arms of 
silver (probably the Mede), belly and thighs of brass 
(the Persian), legs of iron, but the feet part of iron part 
of clay. This last, or Greek, kingdom was to be divided, 
partly strong partly broken, 'and its parts shall not 
cleave together.' The king had also seen that a stone, 
cut out of the mountain without hands, smote the 
image, broke it in pieces, and became a great mountain. 
This is the kingdom which the God of heaven shall set 
up, and which shall never be destroyed, 

In another form the same events, to which Chaldiean 
tradition, as well as Nebucadnezar 's dream referred, 

1 The Chronology of the Bible, 4-7. 



was symbolised by Daniel's dream. From the sea, the 
symbol of the Gentile world, four great beasts came up. 
The first, a lion with eagle's wings, known to us by 
Mesopotamian representations, is again the kingdom of 
Nebucadnezar. The second beast, like a bear, is the 
Median kingdom ; the three ribs in its mouth seem to be 
the three cities on the Tigris which the Medes captured. 
The beast is described as standing upright on one side 
only, for before this kingdom can be firmly set up, a 
third beast, a leopard arises, with four wings and four 
heads, that is, the Persian kingdom, to which dominion 
was given. The four heads are four kings, enumerated in 
the eleventh chapter. The fourth beast, more terrible 
than the others, with iron teeth, devouring, breaking in 
pieces and stamping the residue with the feet of it, and 
having ten horns, is the Macedonian kingdom, with 
the ten Seleucidian kings. 

Among the ten horns another little horn came 
up, before whom there were three of the first horns 
plucked up by the roots, and in this horn were eyes 
like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great 
things. This little horn is Antiochus Epiphanes ; and 
the three horns plucked up by him are his three 
brothers : Seleucus, who was murdered ; Heliodorus, 
who was expelled ; and Demetrius, who had to go 
to Borne, as hostage, instead of Antiochus. He spoke 
great words against the Most High, and wore out his 
saints, and intended to change times and laws. For 
three years and- a half the saints were given into his 
hand ; but then came the judgment by the Ancient of 
Days, the beast was slain, his body destroyed and given 
to the burning flame. His dominion was taken away, 
like that of his predecessors, and a universal and ever- 
lasting dominion was given to ' One like a son of man,' 
who was brought on the clouds of heaven before God, 
and who by the interpreting angel is implied to be the 
representative of ' the people of the saints of the Most 


High,' to whom, as to the Messiah, the kingdom under 
the whole heaven, an everlasting kingdom, shall be given. 

Again, in a third form, the Messianic kingdom is 
described which was expected to follow upon Antiochus 
Epiphanes. The eighth chapter describes the Medo- 
Persian kingdom in the figure of a ram, with two horns, 
of which one was higher than the other and came up 
last. The ram, having pushed westward and northward 
and southward, is attacked by a he-goat, having a notable 
horn between his eyes, the Macedonian kingdom. This 
great horn, however, was broken, after Alexander's 
death, when four notable horns towards the four winds 
of heaven took its place, that is, the four principal 
dominions which arose from Alexander's empire. Out 
of one of these four horns a little horn arose, a king of 
fierce countenance, who shall destroy many also of the 
holy people. But after that he shall have prevented 
the daily morning and evening sacrifice 3,500 times, 
that is, after 1,150 days, or three and a half years, the 
sanctuary shall be cleansed and the transgression of 
desolation ended. 1 

The ninth chapter refers to the same times and 
circumstances. The novelty lies in this, that the 
seventy years of Jeremiah, enlarged into seventy 
weeks, or 490 years, are incorrectly implied to end 
with Antiochus Epiphanes. ' Seventy weeks are de- 
termined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, 
until the transgression shall be finished, and the measure 
of sins shall be filled, until iniquity shall be recon- 
ciled, and everlasting righteousness shall be brought, 
until prophecy and prophet shall be sealed, and a Most- 
Holy be anointed. And thou must know and under- 
stand : From the going forth of the commandment to 
restore and to build Jerusalem unto an Anointed, a 
Prince, are seven weeks. And during threescore and 

1 Bunsen's Bibelwcrk, iii. 670-G73 ; Iloltzmann, in Geschichtc des Vvlhes 
Israel, 101-109. 

u 2 


two weeks the city shall be restored and built with 
street and wall, although in distressed times. And 
after the threescore and two weeks shall an An- 
ointed be cut off, and have no one. And over the city 
and the sanctuary shall bring destruction the people of 
a Prince, who cometh and findeth his end on (the 
march of) the overflooding host ; yet unto the end war 
continues, judgment and desolation. And he shall 
make a strong covenant with many for one week ; and 
during the half week he shall cause the sacrifice and 
oblation to cease ; and on the pinnacle are seen abomin- 
ations, terrible things, but only until destruction and 
judgment are poured on the horrors.' 

If the seventy weeks are considered to be 490 years, 
the first seven weeks might be calculated as reaching" 
to Cyrus. But every attempt has failed to let the 
sixty-two weeks, or 434 years, reach to the clearly 
implied time of Antiochus Epiphanes, who, after the 
murder of Seleucus IV. Philopator, ascended the throne 
in 176-170, and reigned seven years, or one week. 
Curiously enough, these 434 years, if reckoned back 
from 176-175 reach to 609, or to the third year of 
Jehoiakim (609-608), when Daniel is said to have been 
exported. 1 They could be made to reach the fourth 
year of that king (608-607), when the commandment or 
Jeremiah's prophecy went forth. But accordingly the 
first seven weeks would have commenced in 658, or 
twenty-nine years before the thirteenth of Josiah, when 
to Jeremiah, then ' young,' came the word of the Lord for 
the first time. It is not necessary to add, that the 490 
years cannot possibly bridge over the time from the 
commandment to restore and build Jerusalem to any 
possible year of the birth of Jesus Christ. 2 

1 For the dates, see The Chronology of the Bible. It is not probable that 
because of the above reckoning- of 62 weeks the third year of Jehoiakim, 
B.C. 608, instead of the probable year 588, is mentioned as the time when 
Nebucadnezar besieged Jerusalem. 

About the late Mr. Bosanquet's scheme of three successive periods of 


The same subject, the Messianic kingdom ushered in 
by political events ending with Antiochus Epiphanes, is 
once more referred to in the last three chapters of the 
Book of Daniel. An angel appears to him, unseen by 
his companions, and reveals to him what shall befall 
Israel in the latter days. The same or another angel 
formed ' in the similitude of the sons of men,' refers with 
much detail to the combats between the Ptolemies and 
the Seleucidae. Among the latter great prominence is 
given to Antiochus Epiphanes, ' a detestable person, not 
intended for the dignity of the kingdom, and who shall 
come unexpectedly.' He gains victories over the 
Egyptians ; but ships from Chittim, containing the 
Roman envoy Popilius Lamas, who demands the restora- 
tion of the conquered land, oblige him to return. 
Now he turns against the holy covenant, pollutes the 
sanctuary, ' places the desolation that maketh desolate,' 
he takes away the daily sacrifice, he magnifies himself 
above every other god. Three years and a half this 
has to be endured. But ' the people that do know 
their God ' (the Maccabees) will manfully stand up ' and 
do exploits.' At last Antiochus has to yield to the 
kings of the South and North, and the Divine judgment 
follows. 1 

The Book of Daniel helps us to bridge over the 
time from the exportation to Babylon to the rise of 
the Maccabees. Their allies, the Assidseans, we have 
sufficient reason to connect, if not identify, with the 
Essenes, and these with the Rechabites who were 
transported by Nebucadnezar to Babylon. The Macca- 
bees and Assidasans (Essenes) may be presumed to have 
expected the kingdom of the Angel-Messiah after the 
fall of Antiochus Epiphanes. It is this Essenic ex- 
pectation which has been recorded in the Book of 

seventy weeks ending with the birth of Jesus Christ, see Transactions of 
Bihlical Archceology , vol. vi. 

1 For a detailed explanation, see Holtzmann, /. c. 


When it was seen that after the death of Antiochus 
Epiphanes, that is, after the end to which all ' pro- 
phecies ' in the Book of Daniel so clearly point, the long- 
expected kingdom of the Angel-Messiah did not come, 
the expectation was carried on by a prolongation of the 
Danielic times. Almost fifty years before a.d. 6, when 
Judrea had become a Eoman province, a new interpreta- 
tion of the four monarchies preceding the Messianic 
Millennium was set on foot. The four kingdoms were 
now explained in the oracle of the Jewish Sibyl, then in 
the Fourth Book of Esclras, and the Epistle of Barnabas 
as the Babylonian, the Medo-Persian, the Greek, and the 
Eoman kingdoms. Thus the ground was prepared for 
the new conception of Jesus Christ as the Angel-Messiah 
of the vision recorded in the Book of Daniel, and first 
applied to Jesus in the Eevelation of ' John ' though 
without direct reference to the four kingdoms preceding 
his coining. 

We come to the following conclusions about the 
Book of Daniel. Initiated in all the wisdom of the 
Chaldseans or Magi, Daniel knew of the scheme, recorded 
to have been revealed to Zoroaster, about four eras and 
kingdoms, after which should be established on earth 
the heavenly kingdom of the Saviour Serosh, ' the Holy 
One,' the Angel-Messiah. If Nebucadnezar really had 
the dream about the image, and if Daniel explained it 
to him and had similar visions as recorded, they were 
both imbued with the sense that the Angel-Messiah 
must come, but that his Millennium must be preceded 
by a new cycle of four monarchies, of which that of 
Nebucadnezar, corresponding to that of Zoroaster and 
King Vistaspa, was the first. Assuming, for the sake of 
argument, that the entire Book of Daniel as we possess 
it, was not completed in the time of the Maccabees, and 
that it is not a 'prophecy after the event,' we might be 
led further to assume that Daniel referred the little 
horn to Antiochus Epiphanes, and that moreover he, 


like the Maccabees of that time, expected the Aneel- 
Messiah to come after the death of this enemy of c the 
saints of the Most High.' 

But the connection of the Book of Daniel with the 
Iranian expectation of four monarchies followed by the 
celestial kingdom cannot possibly be denied, nor the com- 
position, or at least the completion, of this book in Macca- 
bean times. Yet it may be held, that Daniel did not see 
Antiochus Epiphanes, that he did not share the expecta- 
tion of the Maccabees about the then coming Messiah, 
and that the prophet was enabled to see after the Greek 
empire, the Eoman empire as the fourth, and Jesus of 
Nazareth as the real Serosh or Angel-Messiah, whose 
second coming or return in glory, to establish a terrestrial 
kingdom, a new heaven and a new earth, would be 
preceded by Nero or by Mohammed as the little horn. 

We will only observe here, that on this latter assump- 
tion the Essenic expectation of an Angel-Messiah must 
have been sanctioned by Jesus. If so, the silence of the 
three first Gospels on this all-important point remains 
inexplicable, and Paul, as well as the authors of the 
Eevelation of ' John ' and of the fourth Gospel, must be 
regarded as the first full revealers of ' the truth as it is 
in Jesus.' 

Maccabean Psalms. Some of the Psalms, possibly 
all after the seventy-fourth, seem to date from the Mac- 
cabean time. This is very generally regarded as certain 
with regard to the seventy-third and seventy-fourth 
Psalms ; whilst some will see in the second Psalm a 
hidden reference to the time when, as during the reign 
of Antiochus Epiphanes, the coming of the Messiah 
was supposed to be near. The contents, the language, 
and the form of several Psalms transmitted to us are 
surprisingly similar to the collection entitled ' Psalms 
of Solomon,' which were probably composed in the 
year B.C. 47. 

The Booh Ecclesiasticus, or Jesus-Sirach, we have in 


another place tried to connect, as 'Sirach of Jerusalem,' 
with the Highpriest Seraiah in the time of Nebucadne- 
zar's siege, as whose son or grandson the author seems 
to describe himself in the Appendix to the fiftieth 
chapter. According to the Alexandrian Codex and 
several of the most ancient manuscripts the Highpriest 
Seraiah is stated to have been the son of Eleasar of Jeru- 
salem, and in the Talmud the author of this work is 
called Jehoshua, ben Sira, ben Elieser. Now, Elieser 
or Eleazar is only another form of Azariah, and this 
was the name of the father and predecessor of the High- 
priest Seraiah who was murdered at Biblah in 588. His 
son was called Jehozadak, and his grandson was the 
Highpriest Joshua, who must have known Daniel the 
prophet, if the latter was identical with Daniel the Priest.' 
As this Joshua called himself son of Seraiah, or ben Sira, 
though only his grandson, so Ecclesiasticus, originally 
written in Hebrew, may have been composed and possibly 
translated by a descendant of the Highpriest, since the 
author calls himself Jesus or Joshua, ' son of Sirach of 
Jerusalem.' It is immaterial, whether the translation 
was made during the reign of an earlier or of a later 
Ptolemy. 1 

The original title was probabty ' the Wisdom of 
Sirach,' later called ' Proverbs of ben Sira.' The con- 
nection of the contents of this book with the last High- 
priest before the Captivity, if accepted, would be a 
proof of the existence of a secret tradition, of which 
the Highpriests were the highest organs. 

The absence in this book of every allusion to an 
expected Messiah is best explained by the assumption, 
that according to the secret Jewish tradition, hidden 
wisdom, or Apocrypha, partially revealed by this book, 
an Angel-Messiah was expected. Here there is yet no 
trace of a personification of the Word of God or Wisdom 

1 Einheit der Iteliyionen, i. 466 f. 


of God, the organ of sanctification, but not the organ of 
immortality. Yet Wisdom, coming from the Lord, and 
eternally with Him, raises her sons, those who love her 
as * the life,' and are loved by the Lord. He created 
her from ' the beginning,' and promised her a ' posses- 
sion ' in Israel, where she served before him in the 
tabernacle. A similar notion is expressed in Proverbs. 

Essenic-Buddhistic, especially Therapeutic, is the 
absence of all reference to bloody sacrifices, although 
the incense-offerings, of Moses are mentioned; so are 
the injunctions referring to meals, to mercantile specu- 
lations, to the furthering of strict morality and thus of 
social progress ; the emphasizing of the life of the soul, 
the immortality of the individual ; equality of all men, 
which is the basis of community of goods ; importance 
of the truth and generally of moral duties, indepen- 
dently of mere outward works, partly instead of the 
latter ; prohibition of slavery, and the recommendation 
of hopeful submission. 

The Book of Wisdom we have already considered as 
the almost certain work of Philo, and in connection 
with the introduction of Essenic doctrines into the 

The Books of the Sibyl are written at different times 
in Hebrew. The third book is composed B.C. 140 by 
an Alexandrian Jew, possibly a Therapeut, and the 
fourth book by a Jew in a.d. 79, avIio expects the return 
of Nero. About B.C. 170 the Jewish Alexandrian Aris- 
tobulus had composed a Jewish version of an Orphic 
Hymn, and so a Jewish Alexandrian work was attributed 
to the Ionian Phocylicles of Miletus (about B.C. 540). 
These were no actual forgeries, since the Essene stood 
in connection with Ionic and with Orphic tradition. 
The prophecies of women, called gilryIs_probably_jfter 
the Ionic word for the wih [ of God, h ave been traced 
from Asia Minor toUaly", from Cyme, where they were 
collected in the seventli century, to Cuma3 and thus to 


Borne. 1 The third book of the Sibyl occupies the 
standpoint of the Book of Daniel, and is the earliest 
Scripture known to us in which the Messianic kingdom 
is placed after the Eoman empire. The Messiah is 
identified with Simon the Maccabee. From the land 
of the sun God will send a King, as he once sent Cyrus 
the Anointed or Messiah. He will promulgate over 
all the earth peace and the Israelitic covenant, by re- 
ceiving the Pious or Saints. These may have referred 
especially to the Pious of the Maccabees and the Saints 
of the Essenes, possibly ' the Saints of the Most High ' 
in the Book of Daniel. This Messianic kingdom, which 
is to go forth from Jerusalem, will be preceded by an 
attack of Gentiles on the city and by signs in heaven. 
The supposition of a double Messianic personality, a 
celestial and a terrestrial one, though not excluded, is 
not in any way suggested. 

The Book of Enoch, who is called 'the seer' has been 
traced to Northern Galilee and to the years B.C. 130- 
100, although some passages may have been interpolated 
after the beginning of the Christian era. 2 It was ori- 
ginally written in Hebrew, and several Hebrew frag- 
ments have been traced. 3 The Essenic and especially 
Therapeutic contents of the book are incontestable. No 
specifically Pharisaic principles are referred to, whilst 
the Sadducees, the non-universalists, are designated as 
enemies. Especially Essenic are the injunctions to pray 
at sun-rise, not to swear, to estimate highly the secret 
tradition, deeper knowledge, or Gnosis, not to over-esti- 
mate the value of Scripture, thus implying that it must 
be allegorically interpreted ; the non-reference to bloody 
sacrifices, and a fully developed doctrine of angels, 
headed by the Angel of God or Angel-Messiah. The 

1 Bernays, comp. Hilgenfeld, I. c. 167, n. 4; Duncker /. c. iii. 190, n. 3. 

2 A later date, as suggested by Volkmar, would not affect our argument. 

3 Jellinek, in 1). Morgcnl. Ges. vii. 249, designates the book as a re- 
mainder of Essenian literature, which forms the introductory history of the 
Cabbala, or secret tradition of the Jews. 


Danielic vision of One like a son of man is interpreted 
to refer to One who is also similar to Angels, to the 
Word of God and Son of God, the Lord from heaven, 
the One chosen by the Lord of Spirits. The Messiah is 
also called "Wisdom, Spirit, Grace, Power of God from 
the beginning, Name of God, the never ceasing light 
of Sabaoth, the light of the people of God, of the 
chosen ones, the Son of God. At the same time Mes- 
siah is called ' son of a woman,' probably in reference 
to the Book of Isaiah. His name Messiah was named 
before God before the foundation of the world, and is 
known to the righteous. 

In harmony with Buddhistic conceptions, the Angel- 
Messiah is described as coming to the earth in order to 
dwell among men, but not having found a dwelling 
place he returned to the angels. We saw that Buddha's 
descent is figuratively described as that of an elephant, 
and so here Messiah is described as coming down in 
the form of a white bull with large horns. In the Book 
of Daniel the two-horned he-goat refers, not to Cyrus 
the Messiah, but to Alexander, whom the Koran de- 
signates as Dulkarnaim or the two-horned One. 1 Accord- 
ing to the Book of Enoch, already Adam had come to 
earth as a white bull. We have interpreted the bull- 
symboHsm as referring to the celestial bull, to the con- 
stellation of Taurus with the Pleiades, and have con- 
nected with these seven stars the seven Amshaspands 
and seven Buddhas. Here Enoch, ' the seventh from 
Adam,' as if the seventh Buddha, is identified with the 
Angel-Messiah, that is with the One like a son of man 
in the Danielic vision. Enoch's terrestial body is de- 
scribed as melting away, and his spirit was transformed 
into a heavenly body, * the second body,' expected after 
the coming of Serosh. This is a parallel to Buddha's 
transformation on the mount. Enoch, whose translation 

1 Ashteroth-Karnaiin (Gen. xiv. 5) refers to the two-horned A-Starte, 
(Tshtar, Diana), symbolised by the bull ; Die Plejaden, 91 f., 441, 


is referred to in Genesis, was regarded as the seventh 
incarnation of the An^el of God. No longer after 
seventy weeks, but after seventy undefined epochs, 
Judaism will bring about the promised end. Enoch, or 
the Messiah, will return, the general resurrection of the 
dead will take place, and then the Messiah will clothe 
the righteous with ' garments of life.' But Messiah will 
not take part in the judgment over which God alone 

The Ascension of Moses, written about the year of 
the death of Herod Agrippa I., a.d. 44, by a probably 
Roman Jew, and is known to us in a later interpolated 
edition. Its interest lies in the absence of every trace of 
Essenic doctrine, at the very time when Peter had pro- 
bably founded the Church at Rome, and when Paul, about 
two years after his conversion to the (Essenic) faith 
of Stephen, had not yet been introduced by Barnabas 
to the Church at Antioch. The book ignores the pre- 
Christian Jewish expectations which were recorded in 
the Danielie and Maccabean Scriptures, in the Jewish 
Sibyl, in the Apocrypha of the Septuagint, in the Book of 
Enoch, but probably not already then in the Apocalypse 
of Esdras. This development of doctrine, which we 
have traced to an Essenic and thus to an oriental source, 
formed the basis of the Jewish verbal tradition, later 
called Cabbala, 

The Zohar, literally ' splendour ' or ' glory,' is a book 
which we may here consider, although we know it only 
in the revised form in which it was published in the 
thirteenth century. By eminent Jewish authorities it is 
regarded as the universal collection of the Cabbala, of 
the tradition about the religious philosophy, deeper 
knowledge, or gnosis within the circle of Judaism. 1 
We accept the view that the Zohar is connected with 

1 This is the opinion of Franck and Matter ; but Gratz seems to prove 
that the Zohar is not the source of the Cabbala, which Jellinek traced back 
to the Essenes. 


Essenic tradition, which formed the introductory history 
of the Cabbala, and also with Parsism and Buddhism. 
We connect it with the wisdom of the Chaldasans or 
Magi in which Daniel was brought up, and of which 
the Book of Daniel purports to be the earliest record. 
The parallel between the three classes of the Magi and 
those of the Rabbis leads us to assume as probable the 
division of Eabbinical books into three parts, according to 
the degrees of initiation. Such divisions we find in the 
Zohar, and their respective titles are : ' the Book of the 
Mystery,' then 6 the Large Congregation,' and ' the Small 
Congregation,' in which latter the dying Simon is said 
to have communicated to a limited number of disciples 
his last instructions. This Simon is asserted to have 
been the father of Gamaliel, at whose feet Paul and 
Aquila are reported to have sat. It is not impossible 
that a genuine scripture from the Apostolic age forms 
the groundwork of the Zohar, and that it embodied the 
Messianic views of the great Simeon the son of Hillel 
* the Babylonian,' and the first who received the title 
Rabban. He is by some authorities identified with the 
Simeon of the Gospels. The connection of the Zohar 
with Esseuianism, and thus with Buddhism, tends to 
render this identity of the Rabboni Simeon with the 
Simeon of Luke's Gospel more probable, since the 
Buddhistic legend of Asita forms such a striking parallel 
with the Gospel narrative of Simeon, who 'waited for 
the consolation of Israel.' 

The Zohar contains a full development of the Essenic 
doctrine of the Angel-Messiah. The Word or Wisdom of 
God, the celestial Messiah, is designated as the Creator 
of all things. By this Messiah Adam was to such a 
degree enlightened before his fall, that even angels 
became jealous of him. This reminds us of the Book 
of Wisdom, where the first father is said to have been 
preserved by Divine wisdom. The Zohar relates how 
Adam and Eve heard a voice ' from above ' by which 


they were instructed in the wisdom from above. So 
long as they kept the supernatural power which was 
engrafted on their nature, they were clad, like the 
angels, in garments of heavenly light. Yet the soul has 
a different covering in the heavenly and in the terrestrial 
w< >rld. The Angel-Messiah or ' tree of life,' like Serosh 
called ' the Holy One,' dwells with such men only, in 
whom the male principle, probably the Word or Memra, 
is united with the female principle, the spirit or ' ruach,' 
which word is of female gender. These conceptions 
correspond closely with the doctrines contained in the 
writings of Simon of Samaria, whom we have connected 
with the Essenes. 

If the oriental gnosis was introduced into heterodox 
Judaism and into ' Christianity ' chiefly by the Essenic 
Therapeuts, then it is easy to explain the prevailing 
mysticism of Essenes and Cabbalists. But between the 
two there was the essential difference, that the Essenes 
connected with their doctrinal speculations, which were 
kept secret, their practical and moral aims. Both 
Essenes and Cabbalists regarded tradition as the source 
of a deeper gnostic Scriptural interpretation ; but whilst 
the Essenic doctrines were partly assimilated to Greek 
culture, especially among the Therapeuts, as also in the 
Septuagint and in Philo's writings, no such traces can be 
found in the Talmud or in the Zohar. 

The Book Yezira, or Creation, corresponds with the 
first division of the holy Merkabah or verbal tradition of 
the Jews, whilst the Zohar seems to have referred to 
the second division, to that mysticism which was con- 
nected with the car or rechab of Ezechiel's vision. The 
word ' Merkaba,' being a compound of rechab confirms 
this connection, as also that of the Jewish gnosis with the 
Essenes and their predecessors, the Eechabites. 1 This 
remarkable book, possibly composed by the great Eabbi 

1 Philo, Quis est, 44, 45 ; De Somn. i. 14, 15 ; Das Symbol des Kreuzes, 


Akiba (135 a.d.), perhaps junior contemporary of the 
Apostle James, has been explained to contain an indirect 
but sharp attack against a prevailing heretical gnosis, such 
as Paul promulgated and which the Apostle James disap- 
proved. 1 Although the book contains striking analogies 
and parallels with some of the doctrines of Paul, and also 
with the gnostic writings of the second century, yet one 
of the principal doctrines is the strict Divine oneness, 
coupled with the negation of the dualism which was 
more or less implied by the introduction of the new 
doctrine of the Angel-Messiah and framer of the world, 
which Paul had accepted and applied to Jesus. This 
protest is all the more important since also in the 
Talmud the Angel of God, who stands by his throne, 
therefore called Metatron, though regarded as the highest 
being after God, is neither considered as an object of 
worship nor as a mediator. 

In a polemical dialogue between a Christian heretic 
and Eabbi Idit, the latter admits that the Angel who goes 
before and follows Israel, in whom the ' Name ' of God 
is, and who can pardon transgressions, (therefore, the 
Angel whom Paul calls Christ), is the Metatron, and 
his importance is allowed to be similar to that of God. 
But the heretic having deduced from this that the 
Angel of the Lord ought to be worshipped ' like ' God, 
the Eabbi replies : ' Thou shalt not confound him, the 
Metatron, with God ; we have the conviction, that we 
may not even accept him as a mediator.' Again, the 
apostacy of Elisa ben Abuya, commonly called Achar, is 
in the Talmud attributed to the circumstance that he re- 
garded the Metatron as of about equal rank with God, 
from which he drew the conclusion that there are two 
Divine powers. 2 

1 An intimate associate of the Apostle James, Eabbi Eliazar ben 
Hyrkanos, narrowly escaped death during Trajan's persecution by his 
emphatic 'No' to the question whether he was a Christian (Aboda Sara, 
16, 17; Gratz, 24, note). 

2 Sanhedrim, 38; Shagia, 15; comp. Hirsch Gratz, Gfnostizismus inn/ 
Judmthum, 184(5. 


The Revelation of John. The key for the opening of 
this sealed book is the mysterious symbolism of the tree 
of life in Paradise. The tree of life was symbolised by 
the tree-shaped candlestick of Moses, the seven lamps 
of which, like the seven elevations of the temple of Bel 
or tower of Babel, and the seven steps or ' altars ' of 
the Great Pyramid, referred to the seven planets, that is, 
to sun, moon, and five planets. According to Philo the 
central candlestick represented the sun, but according 
to the deeper knowledge or gnosis ' the Word of God,' 
or ' the Archangelic Word,' the second Deity.' In the 
Apocalypse of John a vision is described, in which 
Christ, the Word of God, appears in the midst of the 
seven candlesticks or lamps. About five hundred years 
before Philo this symbolism, applied to the risen Jesus 
by the Seer of Patmos, was referred to by Zechariah 
the prophet, in his vision of the golden candlestick 
with a bowl on the top of it, from which by pipes the 
gold or golden oil was conveyed to the seven lamps. 
Two olive trees on both sides of the candlestick are 
explained to be two Anointed Ones (Moses and Elijah, 
not Joshua and Zerubbabel), two vessels of the Holy 
Ghost, symbolised by oil, who empty or pour out from 
themselves the gold. The tree of life is the symbol of 
Divine enlightenment, which comes from above to all 
the seven lamps alike, including the central lamp, the 
symbol of the Word of God, of Christ. 

This Divine enlightenment coming from above, and 
of which men are allowed to partake, has for its source 
the seven eyes of the Lord of hosts or of Sabaoth, 
' which run to and fro through the whole earth.' The 
Lord Sabaoth or Sebaot, that is of the seven stars, of 
the Pleiades, later of the planets, sent an Angel to 
Zerubbabel with the message, that, ' not by might nor 
by power,' but by the Spirit of God the things shall 
come to pass which were only typified in those times.' 
Zerubbabel brought forth, or rather put up, the head- 


stone of the temple under shoutings of joy, the stone 
which God laid before Joshua, and on which are set or 
engrafted the seven eyes of Sabaotli. But Joshua and 
those who sit before him are ' men of mark,' or men of 
prophetic import, types of God's servant, of * the man 
whose name is the Branch,' types of the Messiah. The 
latter may by Zechariah have been connected with the 
six men or angels, as Ezechiel had done before him. 
Paul had this symbolism of the candlestick and the 
planets in view when he described Christ-Jesus as ' the 
chief corner stone ' of ' the holy temple in the Lord,' in 
whom the believers are ' builded together for an habi- 
tation of God in the Spirit.' x 

The symbolism of the candlestick, finally applied to 
Jesus Christ as appearing in the midst of the seven can- 
dlesticks, had been applied before Zechariah by Ezechiel 
to six men, and as a seventh in their midst he described 
and distinguished from them, < one clothed with linen 
and a writer's inkhorn by his side,' such as is represented 
on Egyptian monuments and still worn in the East by 
the scribes and men of learning. The linen clothing 
marks as a Priest the angel of grace in the midst of 
the six angels of wrath. In a similar clothing an 
angel, the Angel of the Lord, the Angel-Messiah, the 
Highpriest of Philo, is described as appearing to Daniel. 
It Is the Angel of God who followed the Israelites in 
i the wilderness and through the Eed Sea, and who can 
i < pardon' transgressions. The Divine presence, Shechina, 
: or glory above the Cherub, called this angel of mercy 
and said unto him : ' Go through the midst of the city, I 
through the midst of Jerusalem, and set the mark of 
Tau (T,"the headless cross) upon the foreheads of the 
men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations 
that are done in the midst thereof.' It is the Angel- 

1 Zech. iv. 3 ; vi. 12 ; Eph. ii. 19-22. Das Symbol des Kreuzes, 184 
208 ; cotnp. 87 about Simon of Samaria connecting with the tree of life 
• the' man of Judah/ the Messiah, ' the man of the tree.' 



Messiah ' from the rising of the sun,' and distinguished 
from other angels, who seals with ' the seal of the living 
God ' (the Tau-Cross) the elect of God in the midst of 
the Divine judgments. 1 

The cross, the sign of Divine enlightenment, was first 
connected with fire, as coming from the Pleiades in the 
most ancient spring-equinoctial sign, then with the. sun. 
When, before the Exodus from Egypt, at the time of 
the spring-equinox, the sun had passed over the sign of 
the spring-equinox, Aries, the ram or lamb, then. a lamb 
was slain, with the blood of which the doorposts of the 
Israelites were marked. These formed a blood-stained 
Tau-Cross, seeing which, the avenging Angel of God 
passed by the dwellings of the Israelites. The same 
sign of the Tau-Cross is to save the faithful (144,000) in 
the time of the Messiah, the first of the seven angels, 
who had been with the fathers in the wilderness. 

The planetary symbolism of the candlestick, applied 
to the Messiah by Ezechiel, Zechariah, Philo, and John 
the seer, can be traced back to the construction of the 
great Pyramid and of the temple of Belus, or tower of 
Babel, and it can be connected with the most ancient 
Indian rite known to us, the Soma-sacrifice of the Eig- 
Veda. The juice of the Soma-plant, or Asclepia acida, 
symbol of the tree of life, flowed from the Samudra-bowl 
into the chalices of the seven priests who poured it into 
the sacred fire, following their leader, or Nestri, who 
invoked the Deity symbolised by fire. 2 As in the Soma- 
sacrifice one out of seven priests was distinguished, so 
Ezechiel distinguished the Angel of God or Messiah from 
six men or angels, and so Philo distinguishes the central 
lamp of the candlestick, as the Sun or Word of God, 
from the six other lamps symbolising the moon and five 
planets. Finally, John in the Apocalypse follows this 

1 Dan. x. 5; xii. 6; Ezech. ix. ; Rev. vii. ; Das Symbol des Kreuzes, 19. 

2 Das Symbol des Kreuzes, 113, 114 ; E. Burnouf, Essai sur le Veda, 


Oriental symbolism by describing Christ, the Word of 
God, as appearing in the midst of the seven candlesticks, 
thus assigning to him the place of the Vedic Nestri, and 
by connecting the seven angels with the seven vials, 
similar to the seven chalices of the Soma priests. 

The connection of the tree of life in Eden with the 
four rivers, and with the Messiah, as of the latter 
with the sun, led to the connection of the tree of 
life with the four seasons. Thus Christ, whose symbol 
is the sun, 1 is in the Apocalypse connected with the 
tree of life and with four angels ' standing on the 
four corners of the earth,' as also Christ, the lamb, is 
surrounded by four beasts. We saw that the tree of 
life and knowledge, of Divine wisdom, was already by 
ancient Iranian tradition connected with four other trees, 
representing four monarchies which should precede the 
Millennial kingdom of heaven, to be established on earth 
by the Angel-Messiah. We pointed out that the vision 
of the image of Nebucadnezar and the visions of Daniel 
about the four monarchies must be connected with 
the Chaldean or Magian science in Avhich Daniel was 
brought up. 

We need not here point out in full detail how the 
planetary symbolism of the candlestick of Moses, and 
thus of the tree of life, has been in the Revelation of John 
applied to the risen Jesus Christ. This was done between 
July 68 and June 69, during the reign of Galba, when 
the return of Nero, or Neron-Kesar, was expected, the 
letters of which name have the value of 666. 2 Suffice it 
to say that Christ, the Word of God, who appears over 
the central lamp of the candlestick, the symbol of 
the sun and of the Word of God, is also connected, 

1 The Alpha and Omega, ' the first and the last,' refers to the first and 
the last letter of the Zodiacal Alphabet, Aleph and Oin (later Ain), applied 
to God and to Jesus Christ, and thus to Taurus and Aries, the earliest 
spring-equinoctial signs (Die Plejaden, 409-417). 

• The word Lateinos could never be referred to ( a man.' 

x 2 


as one of seven angels, with the seven spirits of God, 
with the seven stars in his hand, with the seven eyes 
and horns of the lamb, with seven thunders, and the 
opening of the seven seals. 

We pointed out that the seven planets took the place 
of the Pleiades, with which seven stars the seven arch- 
angels of the Iranians seem to have been connected. 
The first of these Amshaspands was the God of light 
himself, till Serosh, the Holy One, the Messiah, took the 
place of Ormuzd, and became his vicar. When the sun 
had taken the place of the principal star in the Pleiades, 
which must have been regarded as the symbol or dwel- 
ling-place of Serosh, when the sun had taken the place 
of the fire coming from the Pleiades, then the spring- 
equinoctial sign, first Taurus, then Aries, became the first 
of the twelve constellations through which the sun 
seemed to pass. Thus Aries, the ram or lamb, had 
become, perhaps already since the time of Abraham, 
connected with the Messiah, whose symbol was the sun, 
first having been fire, as represented by the brazen 
serpent. 1 The connection of the solar with the stellar 
symbolism is indicated in this Apocalypse by the lamb 
with seven eyes and seven horns. 

The reference of the number seven to the planets is 
confirmed by the vision of the book with seven seals, 
each of which is connected with one of the planets. 
For the planets are here enumerated according to the 
days of the week, and the first four seals are evidently 
connected respectively with the moon, Mars, Mercury, 
and Jupiter. For the colour of the horses corresponds 
witli that of these planets, being white, fiery red, black, 
and pale or green-yellow. The only inaccuracy is that 
the colour of Mercury is dark blue, not black. From 
this it follows that the fifth seal was connected with 
Venus, the sixth with Saturn, the seventh with the sun. 


1 serpent,' 

Die Ph'jaden, 265-321. In Hebrew Nachasli means ' brass ' as well a 


The angel described standing at the altar, having a 
golden censer, is evidently the Angel of God or celestial 
Messiah, whose symbol is the sun. It is the angel of 
mercy, the priest of Ezechiel's vision, who there as here 
seals the foreheads of the servants of God, being here 
described as an angel having the seal of the living 
God. 1 

The kingdom of the heavenly Serosh was connected 
with the seventh thousand of years, and so here the 
Messianic kingdom and Millennium is connected with 
the number seven, whilst the connection of this Scrip- 
ture with Oriental tradition leaves no room to doubt 
that this kingdom is intended to represent the seventh 
Millennium, as the Epistle of Barnabas asserts. Not 
till after the opening of the seventh seal, trumpets 
were given to the seven angels, and not before the 
trumpet of the seventh angel had sounded there were 
great voices in heaven saying : ' The kingdom over the 
world is become our Lord's and of his Christ, and 
he shall reign for ever and ever.' According to still 
more ancient Oriental symbolism, confirmed by the 
Book of Daniel, the Messianic kingdom was to follow 
on four monarchies, and so here the first four of the 
seven seals are in a way separated from the rest. The 
events connected with the fourth kingdom of the wicked 
spirits, according to Iranian tradition, and with the 
fourth kingdom followed by the little horn in the Book 
of Daniel, are here connected with the opening of the 
fourth seal. The pale horse with Death as its rider 
is followed by Hell (Hades), by famine, pestilence, and 
war between the beasts, or kings of the earth. The 
same signs are enumerated in the Gospel after Matthew 

1 Job. Brandis, Die Bedeutung der Sieben Thore Thebens; Zcitsrhr. 

Hermes, 1867. lie suggests that also the other cycles of seven follow the 
order of the planets, each cycle apparently beginning with the planet of each 
following week-day. For the attributes of the sun are referred to in such a 
manner in x. 1, xiv. 1, xix. 17, 'that each vision corresponds with one of 
the above-named planets.' 


as preceding the coming of Messiah and the final judg- 
ment which the Maccabees expected after the death of 
Antioclms Epiphanes. 

As the fourth monarchy in the Book of Daniel is 
followed by Antioclms Epiphanes, so here upon the 
fourth seal Nero seems to follow, although his fall is 
described after the sounding of the seventh trumpet. 
After the return of Nero, which was expected at the 
end of 68 or in the beginning of 69, 1 ' John ' expected, 
at once the fall of ' Babylon,' or Imperial Eome, the des- 
cent of the heavenly Messiah and the heavenly Jerusa- 
lem, symbolised by the sun. 

The opening of the first seal is connected with a 
crowned and victorious rider on a white horse, it is 
Augustus, during whose reign the Messiah was born. 
The second seal, being opened, refers to the time of 
Tiberius, who carried his e great sword ' to the Holy 
Land. The third rider, on a black horse, ' having a 
balance in his hand,' introduces us to the famine 
under Claudius, probably in the year 44. The fourth 
epoch is characterised as Death riding on a pale 
horse, with Hell, famines, pestilences, and war in 
his train. When the lamb opens the fifth seal, are 
seen the Christian martyrs slain by Nero, the fifth 
emperor, ' the souls of them that have been slain for 
the Word of God, and for the testimony which they 
bore.' They are the Christians slain in 64, after the 
burning of Eome. The opening of the sixth seal refers 
to the time of Galba's reign, from June 68 to January 
69, to the time when the Apocalypse was composed, 
when the entire Eoman Empire seemed to be shaken. As 
Pliny refers to terrible disasters then caused by earth- 
quakes in Asia Minor, so in Matthew the beginning of 

1 About the historical pseudo-Neros of this time and of later times see 
IIil<renfeld, Einl. N. T. ergte Auxy. 451 ; Nero der Antichrist ; Zeitschrift f. 
v. T. 1800, iv. 421. 


the world's judgment is described with an eye to the pro- 
phetic explanation of passages in Isaiah and Ezechiel. 1 

Our object has been to establish the connection of 
the Eevelation of John with the Book of Daniel, and 
thus with Oriental traditions, especially with the plane- 
tary symbolism of the Mosaic candlestick. We have con- 
nected the latter with Philo's writings, with the visions 
of Zechariah and Ezechiel, as also with the great Pyra- 
mid and the tower of Babel, and finally with the Soma- 
sacrifice described in the Kig-Veda. The Messiah of this 
Apocalypse, as of the Book of Daniel and of the Jewish 
Scriptures which we have connected with it, is the 
Angel-Messiah of the Essenes, who introduced that con- 
ception into non-authorised Judaism, and applied it to 
Jesus. As far as Ave know, this was first publicly done 
through Stephen and Paul. 

We saw that the latter promulgated the universalist 
doctrines of the Essenic Therapeuts of Egypt, and we 
shall see that for this reason even Barnabas, a Levite 
and probably a Palestinian Essene, separated from the 
great Apostle. Also Barnabas has in so far represented 
an illegal Judaism, as he, with the Essenes, interpreted 
the Scriptures allegorically, thus attributing to them an 
essentially different sense. The hatred against Paul, 
as the universalist Essene and open condemner of 
the works of the law, has found its strongest expres- 
sion in the Eevelation of ' John.' Paul is not re- 
cognised as an Apostle, possibly even referred to as a 
false prophet, and the Therapeutic and Paulinic prin- 
ciples of toleration, submission to authority, even to 
that of Nero, 2 equal recognition of Jews and Gentiles 
are condemned. 

1 Pliny's Letters, vi. 16, 20; Is. xxxiv. 4; ii. 18; comp. Rev. vi. 15 
with Is. xxiv. 21, 22 ; verse 16 with IIos. x. 8 ; see Luke xxiii. 30. This 
historical interpretation is taken from Holtzmann, in Bunsen's Bibelwerk, iv. 
644-646 ; see ff. and Ililgenfeld, /. c. 407-452, for the remainder. 

2 "Rom. xiii. 1. f. ; comp. Rev. xvi. 13, &c. Volkmar identifies Paul and 
the ' false prophet.' 


The Christology of the Apocalypse does not, any- 
more than that in the Book of Daniel, clearly define 
the Messiah as an incarnate angel come clown from 
heaven. As if wishing to spare those who expected the 
Messiah to be the anointed man of the Old Testament, 
Christ is in both Scriptures described as ' One like a son 
of man,' raised by the clouds of heaven to the throne 
of God. The seer does not say, but implies, that the 
Messiah is the Creator of the material world, an opinion 
which was shared also by Paul. Christ is in the Apo- 
calypse described as ' the beginning of the creation of 
God,' who is perhaps regarded as the Creator of the 
immaterial,- spiritual, or heavenly world only. 

Of the first-created beings, presumably those whom 
God is in Genesis reported to have addressed as co-' 
Creators of man, Christ is by ' Jolm ' regarded to have 
been the first, the first of seven archangels. He is dis- 
tinguished from the six other angels, and is alone en- 
trusted with ' the seal of the living God.' A premundane 
created being like Christ, according to Essenic concep- 
tion, coidd be regarded as the Creator of the material 
world, and yet God could be described as the real Crea- 
tor of heaven and earth, who had delegated the power 
over all things to the first of created beings. A similar 
doctrine was taught by Paul. 1 The conception of 
Christ as the first of seven angels forms an exact parallel 
to the Eastern symbolism of Serosh, the vicar of God 
and first of seven archangels, to whom the rule over the 
material world was transmitted by the God of light. 
Paul in his Epistle to the Colossians protests against 
such a connection of Christ with other angels. 

These conceptions of the seer ' Jolm ' about the 
Messiah are inseparably connected, as we pointed out, 
with the planetary symbolism of the Mosaic candlestick, 
and with corresponding earlier Egyptian, Mesopotamia!!, 
Indian, and Chinese traditions. As the juice from the 

1 Rev. x. G ; comp. Rom. xi. 30 ; 1 Cor. viii. 5, 6 ; xv. 28 ; Eph. iii. 0. 


Soma-plant and the oil from the olive tree, both symbols 
of the tree of life, was represented above the seven Indian 
priests, and above the seven candlesticks of Zechariah's 
vision, denoting thereby the superhuman source of en- 
lightenment, so the Divine Presence above the Cheru- 
bim, seen by Ezechiel, called upon the one of seven men 
who was clothed in linen, the Messianic Highpriest, 
whether angel or man, to mark the foreheads of the 
servants of God by the sign of the Tau-Cross. Again, 
as Philo had described the central lamp of the candle- 
stick to be the symbol of the sun and also of the Word 
of God, ' the Archangelic Word,' so in the Eevelation 
Christ is called the Word of God, and described as s he 
that walketh in the midst of the seven candlesticks,' 
and also as the first of seven archangels, who seals 
with ' the seal of the living God ' (with the Cross) the 
servants of God. This is not Paulinic Christology. 

Paul had not stated whether or not Jesus was born 
like other men, nor whether the Holy Ghost was first 
communicated to him on his baptism. ' John ' clearly 
distinguishes the celestial from the terrestrial nature 
of Christ, yet connects the Word of God with Jesus. 
' John ' was in the island ' on account of the Word of 
God and the testimony of Jesus.' The revealer announces 
himself as Jesus who was dead and now is ' alive for 
evermore,' having the keys of death and hell, and being 
6 the First and the Last, the living One.' Thus the 
risen ' Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the Firstborn 
of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth,' is 
recorded to have revealed himself under the same title 
which is given to ' the Alpha and Omega,' to the 6 Lord 
God, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the 
Almighty.' 1 

It is in harmony with this identification of God and 
of Christ, or the first of seven angels, that the angel 
who had an opened little book, speaks alternately in 

1 Oomp. Rev. i. o, 7,8,9; ii. 17, 18 ; xxii. 13. 


the inline of God and of Christ, as whose two witnesses 
the reappearing Moses and Elijah seem to be implied. 1 
From this angel and all other angels, thus also from 
Christ, is clearly distinguished Jesus, ' the Lion which is 
of the tribe of Judah, the Eoot of David,' the One of all 
the inhabitants of heaven or of earth who was ' able to 
open the book,' and ' who has conquered,' (so as) ' to open 
the book and the seven seals thereof.' This Jesns, born 
like other men, for he genealogically descended from 
David, has been raised as ' One like a son of man,' and 
has become at one with the first of ' the seven angels 
which stand before God.' And yet, as ' Jesns Christ, the 
faithful witness,' he is distinguished from any angel. 
Having been raised on the clouds of heaven to the 
throne of God, having occupied the position of Christ' 
as the premundane Word of God, as the first of seven 
angels, he who on earth was the 'fellow-servant' of 
John, now sends his angel to the seer, and forbids him, 
as Eabbi Idit forbade later a Christian heretic, to wor- 
ship any other than God. 

The same Angel whom the raised Jesus Christ 
designates as ' My Angel,' is in the same chapter ex- 
plained to be the Angel of the God ' of the spirits of 
the prophets.' For both, God as well as Christ-Jesus, 
are the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last. Yet 
in the Apocalypse of John the eternal Word of God, 
the first of seven Angels, is distinguished from and at the 
same time identified with the risen Jesus Christ. The Lion 
of the tribe of Judah, the Eoot of David, the faithful 
witness who was crucified at Jerusalem, ' like a son of 
man' was carried on the clouds to the throne of God, 
and is now the first of the seven Archangels standing 
before God, the Angel from whose hands Jesus took the 
book of mysteries. 

Paul opposed in his Epistle to the Colossians the 

1 Rev. x. 6; xi. 3: comp. xiv. 14, 17; v. 1-5; xxii. 7-20.; Hoekstra, 
Th. Tijdachr.m. 373 fj 398 1'. 


distinction, which is made in this Apocalypse, of a 
celestial Christ and a terrestrial Messiah, by the doctrine 
of the fulness or Plenitude of God dwelling bodily 
in the one person Christ- Jesus. 

The Apostle warns the Colossians against an Essenic 
false teacher, against ' a certain person,' whom he might 
name, and who threatens to carry them off as plunder 
1 by philosophy and (which is) vain deceit, in accordance 
with mere human traditions and earthly rudiments, and 
not in accordance with Christ.' It has pleased God, 
that the eternal Christ, ; who is the Image of the Unseen 
God, the Firstborn of all creation,' in whom, by whom, 
and unto whom ' all things have been created,' both in 
heaven and earth, that this ' man from heaven,' as Paul 
writes to the Corinthians, that He who is the embodi- 
ment of ' the whole ' Plentitude of God, not of a Divine 
plentitude divided among Angels, should, as Jesus, ' in 
the body of his flesh, by death,' yea ' by the blood of 
his cross ' make peace, and ' reconcile ' those who were 
alienated from God and his enemies. 1 

We saw that the same double personality of a 
celestial and a contemporaneous terrestrial Messiah, 
which is the characteristic feature of the Christology 
in the Apocalypse, is assumed in the pre-Christian 
Targum after Jonathan, where the Messianic Word of 
God is said to rejoice over God's servant, the Messiah. 
The same distinction was made by the Christian gnostic 
Cerinthus, whose Christology, in every essential point, 
may be regarded as identical with that in the Eevelation 
of l John.' For even the view of Cerinthus that Christ, 
because a 'spiritual being,' departed from Jesus before 
lie suffered, is not excluded by the doctrine of Christ in 
the Apocalypse. According to the earliest statement of 
Irenaeus, Cerinthus did believe in the humanity of Jesus, 
1 that Jesus suffered and rose again'. This is emphati- 
cally declared by ' John,' who refers to the redemption by 

1 Col. ii. 6-9; i. 19-22, comp. Gal. i. 7 ; 1 Cor. xy. 47. 


the blood of Jesus, to his translation on the clouds of 
heaven as one ' like ' a son of man, and to his appearing 
as Jesus and as Christ after his death. 

Thus according to Cerinthus and according to John 
at Patmos the man Jesus was after his death united 
with Christ, whom the one calls a ' spiritual being,' the 
other, the first of seven Angels from whose hands Jesus 
took the book. Because Cerinthus distinguished Jesus 
from Christ whilst on earth, Epiphanius declares, that 
Cerinthus denied that Jesus was the Christ, 1 that Christ 
had come in the flesh. Like Paul's Epistle to the Colos- 
sians, the First Epistle of the Apostle John protests 
against this, as we shall consider further on. If so, 
the Apostle John cannot possibly have written the Apo- 
calypse, containing the Cerinthian doctrine of Christ. 

According to a tradition which reaches back to Poly- 
crates, a personal disciple of the Apostle John, the latter 
designated Cerinthus at Ephesus, where he met him 
in a bath, as 'the enemy of truth.' Cajus, a Eoman 
presbyter, at the end of the second century, asserts that 
Cerinthus falsely attributed to the Apostle John — pro- 
bably by reference to Churches in Asia Minor, where 
the latter was known — his own record of visions or 
revelations conveyed to him by angels. 

Dionysos of Alexandria (+ 265) referred to the 
assertion of some of his predecessors among the 
presbyters of Alexandria, that ' the book has a false 
title, for it is not of John,' nor ' even a revelation ; ' and 
Cerinthus, ' wishing to have reputable authority for his 
own fiction, prefixed the title.' Dionysos adds : ' It is 
highly probable that Cerinthus designedly affixed the 
name (of John) to his own forgery ; for one of the doc- 
trines which lie taught was, that Christ would have 
an ' earthly kingdom ' of a thousand years' duration, 
as recorded by ' John ' in the Apocalypse. Dionysos 
regarded as uncertain who the John of the Apocalypse 

1 Epiph. liar, xxviii. 1. 


was, but he saw no reason for doubting that ' a John ' 
wrote it. He implies that the non- Apostolic author 
may have had a double name, like John-Marcus who, 
as he observes, yet is called John in the Acts. His 
only reason for not venturing to set aside the book is, 
that ' there are many brethren who value it much.' l 

Dionysos does not say a word against the presbyterial 
tradition of Alexandria (as of Borne), that Cerinthus 
was the John of the Apocalypse, thus almost implying 
that this gnostic was called John-Cerinthus. If we add 
to this the supposition that Cerinthus may have been 
one of the elders of Ephesus, the whole difficulty of 
the dark passage in the writings of Papias (+ 156 or 
162 2 ) might be cleared up, who distinguishes a 
presbyter John from the Apostle John. Papias 
refers to the tradition that two Johns lived in 
Asia and were buried at Ephesus, where the monu- 
ment of the Apostle was not distinguished from that 
of his namesake. He adds: 'We are bound to take 
notice of this (the two Johns), for it is natural that 
the other (the presbyter John) is accepted, when some- 
body will not (will not accept?) that the former (the 
Apostle John) has seen (had the visions of) the Apoca- 
lypse published under the name of John.' 3 

What we know about the Church at Ephesus can 
be well harmonised with the assumption of efforts 
made by Cerinthus in that Church, as almost certainly 
in that of Colossi, against Paul and his doctrines. Paul 
had spent two years at Ephesus, where he left Aquila 
and Priscilla, and was followed by Apollos. From 
Ephesus Paul wrote to the Corinthians that a great 
and effectual door was there opened unto him ; but he 

1 Eus. H. E. iii. 28; vii. 25 ; Iren. Hcer. i. 26 ; Epiph. Bter, xxviii. 6; 
Theod. fab. Hcsr. ii. 3. 

2 Waddington, Inscr. xxxi. 2, p. 232 f. (1867). 

3 About the text see Eus. H. E. iii. 39 ; conip. Leimbach, Das Papias 
Fragment, 1875 ; Weifteubach, Das Papias Fragment : Hilgenfeld, Zeit- 
schriftf. w. T., 1875. 


admitted at the same time and place that there were 
4 many adversaries.' Among these may well have been 
such who had before him preached Christianity in a 
non-Panlinic form. That the Church at Ephesus was 
founded by Paul is a mere assumption, not proved by 
the Scriptures. He refers to such, who did not regard 
him as an Apostle. When he took leave of the elders 
of Ephesus, whom he had summoned from Miletus, 
he warned them that after his departing 'grievous 
wolves ' would ' enter in ' the presbytery, ' not sparing 
the flock.' 'Also from among yourselves men will 
arise who speak perverse things to draw away the 
disciples after them.' Among the perverse elders of 
Ephesus, who would arise after Paul's departure from 
Miletus, and against whom he warned the Ephesian 
elders in his farewell address in this city, may have been 
Cerinthus, whom at Ephesus the Apostle John called an 
enemy of the truth. Paul pointed to him in his Epistle 
to the Colossians, all but calling him by name, and he 
seems also indirectly to refer to him as a dangerous false 
teacher in his address at Miletus. 

If Cerinthus had an opportunity in any of his writ- 
ings, we may safely assume that he would reckon Paul 
among ' wicked persons,' and especially as belonging to 
those who have been tried by the Church at Ephesus, 
by the Church where Paul had met so ' many adver- 
saries,' and which evil persons Ephesus could not 'bear.' 
Cerinthus would not have resisted the temptation of 
referring to such who ' say they are Apostles, and are 
not,' thus pointing to Paul's statement, that to some he 
was ' not an Apostle ' though he asserted to be one. 
Cerinthus may have been led to say that Ephesus has 
found such to be ' liars.' Paul having accepted the faith 
of Stephen, of the colleague of Nicolas, called prose- 
lyte of Antioch, Cerinthus could regard Paul as belong- 
ing to the Nicolaitans, who, as we shall see, derived 
their name from the former, and who would be hated 


by Jewish Christians because of their dealings with 
Gentiles, which in the received figurative sense would 
make them chargeable with immorality. Cerinthus 
might well have lamented, after the death of Paul, that 
the Church at Ephesus had left her ' first love,' that is, 
that she had changed her original form of Christianity, 
probably more akin to the gnosticism of Cerinthus, for 
another, perhaps for Petrinic Christianity, and this would 
be designated by Cerinthus as a fall. 1 

These passages in a Scripture which excludes Paul 
from the Apostolic body, which promulgates Cerinthian 
Christology, and which was attributed to Cerinthus by 
presbyterial tradition of the Eoman and of the Alexan- 
drian Church, can be easily referred to Paul. For the 
latter in the Epistle to the Colossians, by the expression 
' a certain person,' seems to have pointed to Cerinthus, 
and likewise in his Epistle to the Galatians, the Apostle 
uses the same word in the plural, ' certain persons,' 
when speaking of some who troubled the Galatians, 
and strove to ' pervert the gospel of Christ,' as preached 
by Paul. 

These anti-Paulinic views of Cerinthus were confirmed 
by his followers ; for, like the anti-Paulinic Ebionites, 
they continued to use, up to the fourth century, Mat- 
thew's Gospel only. There were Ebionites still in the 
time of Epiphanius (+ 403), who connected Christ with 
angels and archangels, as this is done by the ' Eevela- 
tion of John.' It can be proved that Ebionites and 
Elkesaitans, like Cerinthus and probably all Palestinian 
Essenes, rejected Paul and his Epistles, as also the ca- 
nonical Acts. 2 The first Christian Apocalypse, that of 
'the twelve Apostles of the Lamb,' and of the ruler of 
the Gentiles ' with a rod of iron,' represents that anti- 
Paulinic Jewish-Christianity, with which the Gentile- 

1 Kev. ii. 1-7. 

2 Ireii. Har. i. 20; Orig. c. Cels. v. Gl, Go, &c. ; Eus. H. E. iii. 27 ; Theod. 
Hcer.fab. ii. 1 ; Epiphanius, Ilcer. xxx. 3, 16; Hilgenfeld, I. c. 39-41. 


excluding Essenes of Palestine and Cerinthus may be 
connected. 1 Cerinthus lived in Asia Minor, and was 
brought up in Egypt, where were such who taught a 
narrow Judaism, against which Apollos, like Paul, pro- 
tested, as the latter did against Cerinthian Christ ology, 
which we meet in the Apocalypse. To the Gentile-exclud- 
ing principle of Cerinthus points also the statement of 
Epiphanius, that Cerinthus belonged to those who blamed 
Paul for his relations with Cornelius, the reported first 
fruit of the Gentile Church. 

The connection of a celestial but Gentile-excluding 
kingdom of thousand years with the reign of an Angel- 
Messiah was, as we pointed out, an Oriental tradition, 
only partly, or without the Millennium, developed and 
applied to Jewish history in the Book of Daniel. 
Cerinthus is the first of whom we can prove that he 
thus supplemented the Book of Daniel by the doc- 
trine of the Millennium, whether he wrote the Eevela- 
tion of John or not. The Book of Daniel, the pre- 
Christian Targumim and Cerinthus, like the Ebionites 
and Essenes, made no distinction between Judaism and 
the kingdom of heaven, or that which was already 
in the time of Cerinthus called Christianity. But 
Irenasus informs us that Cerinthus, unlike some Ebio- 
nites, regarded the Word of God or Christ as Creator of 
the world, and taught that the world did not know the 
true God till he was manifested in Christ. This contrast 
between the God of Judaism and the God of Christianity, 
and thus between the Old and New Testament, was the 
fundamental doctrine of Marcion, who, like Philo and 
Cerinthus, placed the highest subordinate spirit, the 
mighty but not almighty framer of the world, between 
God as the absolute good, and the Devil as the principle 

1 Some Ebionites (Essenes ?) admitted the human nature of Jesus, and 
so did Cerinthus and the ' John' of the Apocalypse, but Barnabas denied the 
descent from David. The distinction of the Angel having power over the 
fire from the Angel of the waters (Rev. xiv. 18; xvi. 5) may be connected 
with the Essenic water- and fire-baptism. 


of evil. Cerinthus taught that Jesus, the son of Joseph 
and Mary, was born like other men, ' not of a virgin,' 
and ' after his baptism Christ descended upon him 
in the form of a dove from the Supreme Euler,' 
when ' he proclaimed the unknown Father, and per- 
formed miracles; at last Christ departed from Jesus, 
and then Jesus suffered and rose again, while Christ 
remained impassible, inasmuch as he was a spiritual 
being.' 1 

With these views it is easy to connect those at- 
tributed to him by Epiphanius about the continued 
validity of all the injunctions of the law, and about 
the Millennium, to which Cajus refers. Cerinthus, like 
Barnabas and Eleazar at Adiabene, regarded the works 
of the law as absolutely necessary to salvation, and he 
must have opposed Paul as violently as Eleazar opposed 
Ananias at Adiabene, and as, for the contrary reason, 
Paul opposed Peter at Antioch. We saw that a simi- 
lar difference existed between the Palestinian Essenes, 
as strict observers of the law, notwithstanding their 
allegorical and gnostic Scripture-interpretation, and the 
Egyptian Essenes or Therapeuts, who insisted on the 
perfect equality of Gentiles and Jews. We shall connect 
Barnabas and Cerinthus with the Palestinian Essenes, 
and we have connected Paul and Apollos with Thera- 
peutic doctrines. If Cerinthus was led to Christianity 
through Alexandrian Judaism, he cannot have accepted 
the Therapeutic principle of universality, like Paul and 
Apollos, but he clung to that narrow Judaism, the 
spreading of which Paul tried to check in Colossa3, 
Apollos in Alexandria. 

Cerinthus opposed that liberty which regarded itself 
not bound by the fetters of the law, which liberty Paul 
had openly confessed and generally promulgated. That 
4 glorious liberty,' checked only by the Spirit of God, 
and which relies on conscience as a sufficient guide, had 

1 Iren. Heer. i. 26. 


led Paul not to condemn the eating of meat sacrificed 
to idols. Cerinthus must have hated this liberty, and 
what it often led to, as much as the writer of the 
Apocalypse hated the Nicolaitans, who ate ' things 
sacrificed unto idols ' and committed ' fornication.' We 
explain this latter charge by that figurative sense in 
which alone it could be said that Israel 'went a 
whoring after other gods,' or ' with their inventions.' 
In this sense we have explained the narratives about 
Thamar and about Eahab. Ezra had condemned the 
marriage between Hebrews and strangers as an unclean- 
ness and abomination, and had ordered the prescribed 
atoning sacrifice. Thus also Zechariah's vision about 
the woman in the ephah, symbolising ' wickedness,' pro- 
bably referred to the same illegal concubinages or 
whoredoms. So the Nicolaitans may have been charged 
with fornication because of their making no distinction 
between Gentiles and Jews. By not forbidding the 
eating of things sacrificed to idols, a bridge between 
Jews and Gentiles had been erected — an illegal affinity 
between them. Again, in a figurative sense, those 
Christians who are called Nicolaitans are designated as 
4 children ' of Jezebel, and followers of the teaching of 
Balaam, which led Israelites ' to commit whoredom with 
the daughters of Moab ' and to eat and bow before their 
gods. The reference to Paul's First Epistle to the Co- 
rinthians is confirmed by the hidden reference to the 
' deep things ' or depths of the knowledge of God, 
to the gnosis, which Paul and others preached, and 
which led to ' the depths of Satan,' in the opinion of 
'John.' 1 

The intention to connect Paul with the Nicolaitans, 
admitted by many interpreters, becomes more plausible 
when we consider the connection we tried to establish 
between Paul and Stephen, whose colleague, as one of the 
seven deacons, was Nicolas, ' the proselyte ofAntioch,' 

1 See pp. 141-143 ; Rev. ii. 24 ; I. Cor. ii. 10. 


according to Irenseus, from whom the Nicolaitans derived 
their name. The unimpeachable testimony as to the 
identity of this deacon with the founder of the sect of 
Christians who ate things sacrificed to idols, which Paul 
did not forbid, and who committed ' fornication,' in- 
directly confirms our figurative interpretation of this 
charge. For it is absolutely impossible to assume that 
Nicolas, one of the ' men of honest report, full of the 
Holy Ghost,' on whom after prayer the Apostles laid 
their hands, should have been in the literal sense of the 
word a fornicator, or the founder of a sect of Christians 
who could be charged with such offence. 

Together with the Apostle Barnabas, the author of 
the Epistle bearing his name, and which we shall now 
consider, Cerinthus may be connected with that phase of 
Oriental and Essenian gnosticism which was represented 
by the Anti-Paulinic and Gentile-excluding Essenes 
of Palestine, as distinguished from the universalist 
Essenes of Egypt. If Cerinthus wrote the Revelation 
of John about the return of Jesus as Angel-Messiah, he 
is the most probable individual of whom a conversa- 
tion with the patriarch Eabban Gamaliel is recorded in 
the Talmud. The latter asked a Christian philosopher 
about the continued validity of the law after the future 
coining of Christ, and was answered in the affirmative, 
the Christian citing words of Jesus, as probably re- 
corded in the Gospel of the Hebrews, known to us by 
a later version in Matthew : ' I am not come to diminish 
or to enlarge the law of Moses.' 1 

We regard Cerinthus as the probable author of the 
Apocalypse of John. The Apostle John cannot have be- 
lieved in Jesus Christ as present or future Angel-Messiah, 
of which doctrine there is no trace in the first three 
Gospels. Early presbyterian tradition of the Roman 
and of the Alexandrian Church pointed to Cerinthus as 
the real author of the Apocalypse of John. Like John- 

1 Cited by Grata, I. c. 23, 24. 

i 2 


Marcus, Cerinthus may also have been known under the 
name of John, as Dionysos seems to imply. In this 
case John-Cerinthus may have been 'the presbyter 
John,' mentioned by Papias (+ 156 or 163) as a living 
authority, whom he distinguishes from the Apostle 
John and the other ' disciples of the Lord,' without re- 
ferring to Paul, as if this Apostle had been one of the 
repeaters of ' strange precepts,' not ' given by the Lord,' 
an outsider. The presbyter John was buried at Ephesus 
by the side of the Apostle John. Paul refers to per- 
verse elders at Ephesus, where he had long ministered, 
and where were disciples of John or Essenes ; the John of 
the Apocalypse refers to wicked persons at Ephesus, who 
wrongly called themselves Apostles, as Paul did, in the 
opinion of some. Whilst there is nothing in this Scrip- 
ture which, from what we know of Cerinthus, he could 
not have written, the Christology of the Apocalypse 
does not exclude but clearly includes that of Cerinthus, 
as transmitted by Irengeiis. Nor do we know that any- 
body else preached such a doctrine. Cerinthus (and 
Papias) expected a Messianic Millennium, the late trans- 
mitted details of which probably originated in a carnal 
explanation of what Cerinthus may have referred to the 
spiritual marriage feast of the Lamb of God. The con- 
nection of the doctrine of Cerinthus and of the Apo- 
calypse of John with the Eastern and Essenic gnosis is 
undeniable, to which latter also belonged the scheme of 
a Messianic kingdom of heaven, forming the seventh 
thousand of years. This scheme was indirectly recog- 
nised by Ezra, since the chronology from Adam to 
Moses lias been so arranged as to place five links 
between them, and thus to make Moses the seventh 
organ of oral tradition from Adam. 1 

Whoever may have been the author of the Eeve- 
lation of John, no more than the Book of Daniel 

1 Adam, Methuselah, Shem, Isaac, Levi, Jochebed, Moses ; comp. the 
Millennial scheme, the centre of which is the year B.C. 586, pp. 288, 289. 


does it contain any prophecy. The spirit of pro- 
phecy has been checked by the misleading influences 
of dogma. 

The Apocalypse of Esdras, or Ezra, first written in 
Greek, and of Eoman origin, cited by the author of the 
ascension of Moses, was composed before a.d. 44, and 
probably about B.C. 30. The eagle-vision can only be 
referred to the Greek empire, to the Seleucidian kings 
followed by the Eoman triumvirate. 1 The Messianic 
kingdom is not to last a thousand years, but only 400. 
It will be inaugurated by the descent of the Angel- 
Messiah (not Jesus), who is higher than all angels, and 
will descend on Zion with thousands of angels in his 

The Epistle of Barnabas was composed by the 
Apostle Barnabas some time after the destruction of 
Jerusalem, essentially in the form we possess it, according 
to the unanimous voice of the ancient Church. The 
text known to us is cited, as written by the Levite of 
Cyprus, seven times by Clement of Alexandria and 
thrice by Origen, whilst Eusebius and Jerome regard 
the Epistle as authentic. Not even a doubt is mentioned 
about the fellow-worker of Paul having written this 
Epistle, although it has probably been revised in later 
times. The arguments brought forward by modern 
critics against the Apostolic source of this Epistle are a 
very natural upshot from the artificially prepared soil, 
on which the dogmatic structure of the Christian 
Church has been erected. The fundamental principle of 
the Acts is not to admit the presence of two antago- 
nistic parties at the beginning of the Apostolic age, the 
one headed by Peter and James, the other by Paul, 
and to exclude the Essenic element from the Apo- 
stolic Church. According to the Acts, Barnabas was 
chosen and sent by the Holy Spirit, for which reason he 
received Apostolic rank. The author of the Epistle of 
1 Hilgenfeld, Zeitschriftf. v\ T. 1878, III., p. 400 f. 


Barnabas was evidently an Essene, and denied that Christ 
was the Son of David as well as the Son of God. The 
writer, whose Christology seems to have been akin to 
that of Cerinthns, could not be acknowleged as the 
twelfth Apostle, and as the Levite of Cyprus and one 
of the Seventy, although the ancient Church had done 
so and called him an apostle. 1 

The arguments invented by modern criticism for 
the purpose of correcting a Clement of Alexandria, an 
Origen, and the Church-historian Eusebius, are chiefly 
based on the supposition that a learned Levite could 
not have had so incorrect notions of the Mosaic law 
and its institutions as the writer of this scripture be- 
trays. 2 But apart from the impossibility of admitting 
that the highest authorities of Christian antiquity could 
have overlooked or not sufficiently weighed these cir- 
cumstances, the evident Essenic character of the Epistle 
leads us to regard Barnabas as a Levite who had joined 
the Essenic association, having been brought up with 
Paul under Gamaliel, according to late recorded Cyprian 
tradition. As an Essene, Barnabas would not consider 
himself bound by the letter of Scripture, and his Epistle 
proves that, like the Essenes, he regarded not the 
literal but the figurative sense of the law and its in- 
stitutions as conveying the full truth. 

Here again we have a double name, for Barnabas 
was called Joseph, and received, from the Apostles, we 
are told, the surname of Barnabas, or ' son of pro- 
phecy ' or ' admonition.' He has on sufficient grounds 
been identified with Joseph Barsabas, who, with Matthias, 
was set up as a candidate for the twelfth apostleship, 
between the fortieth and the fiftieth day after the re- 
surrection of Christ, according to the Acts. This Joseph 
belonged to those men who had ' companied ' with 

1 Ens. //. E. i. 12; comp. iii. 25; Clem. Alex. 7, 20; v. 10. 

2 Bishop von Ilefele, Das $e7vd$chreiben des Apostels Barnabas ; Heberle, 
in Ilerzop-'s Cyld<>piidic, 


the Apostles all the time that the Lord Jesus ' went in 
and out ' among them, beginning from the baptism of 
John, unto the same day that he was taken up from 
them. Such a change of letters is not unusual, and 
moreover the Codex D and the Ethiopian translation 
read, in the passage quoted, Barnabas instead of Barsa- 
bas. In the Eecognitions the name of Barnabas, not 
of Barsabas, is identified with that of Matthias. This 
leads to the supposition that the substitution in the 
Acts of Matthias for Barnabas the Essene is not his- 
torical. 1 Indeed the connection of Essenes with the 
aboriginal Church would have undermined the funda- 
mental principle of the Acts, as it would have proved 
the existence of Oriental and Gnostic elements in the 

Like the Epistle to the Hebrews, Barnabas aims at 
the conversion of his readers, probably the Judaising 
party in Alexandria to which Apollos had referred, 2 to 
a higher because typical interpretation of the law, 
to the new covenant dimly foreshadowed by the old, to 
the spiritual fulfilment of all which seemed prophetic in 
Judaism. At the same time the Apostle insists on that 
particularist Judaism which excluded the Gentiles, as all 
Essenes or disciples of John in Palestine seem to have 
done, in contradistinction to the fundamental doctrine 
of the universalist Therapeuts. Because Paul represented 
the doctrines of the latter, Barnabas separated from 
him, and so did Mark, the nephew or sister's-son of 
Barnabas, and the reported first bishop of the Alex- 
andrian Church. If Barnabas was in Alexandria and in 
Rome before the crucifixion of Jesus, as the tradition 
in the pseudo-Clementines implies, he and probably 

1 Acts 1.21 -25; Recog. i. 60 ; Strom, ii. 20; Hipp. (?) ii. App. 

2 Barnabas is said to have been as a direct disciple of Jesus in Alexan- 
dria, according to the tradition recorded in the Homilies (i. 6-9) and 
Recognitions (l. 7). If the latter gives the more correct and the original 
tradition, the preacher in Rome, of whom the Homilies speak, was Barnabas, 
and he pointed out to Clement of Rome the new doctrine. 


Mark were teachers in Alexandria before Apollos 
wrote, if he did, his Epistle to the Hebrews or Alexan- 
drians, attributed to Barnabas by Tertnllian ; 1 that is, 
the Epistle to the Jewish Christian part of the Alex- 
andrian Church. 

The Christology of the Epistle of Barnabas differs 
not only in the question about the admission of Gentiles 
from that of Paid and Apollos. Barnabas, like these, 
regards Christ as the Angel-Messiah, though, unlike 
Paul and Apollos and the John of the Apocalypse, he 
denies the Davidic descent of Christ-Jesus. Yet he 
distinguishes Christ from Jesus by asserting that 
his flesh was given up ' to corruption,' after he had 
offered it for the sins of his people. Jesus revealed ' the 
resurrection from the dead,' but it is not said he rose 
bodily. ' Jesus, who was manifested both by type 
and in the flesh, is not the Son of man, but the Son of 
God ; since, therefore, they were to say that Christ was 
the son of David, fearing^and understanding the error of 
the wicked (Jews), he saith : " The Lord said unto my 
Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I make thine enemies 
thy footstool.'" Thus also Isaiah, by a falsified text, is 
asserted to have referred words to Christ, recorded to 
have been addressed to Cyrus the Anointed. Barnabas 
tries to prove that the wicked Jews cannot be the heirs 
of the covenant, since ' the tables of the testament of 
the Lord ' were broken, after Moses had received 
them ' written in the spirit by the finger of the hand 
of the Lord.' But ' learn now how We (the good 
Jews) received it. Moses received as a servant, but the 
Lord himself, having suffered in our behalf, hath given 
it to us, that we should be the people of inheritance.' 
In another passage Christ is called ' Lord of all the 
world, to whom God said at the foundation of the 

1 Partly recognised in the Churches under the title of ' The Epistle of 
Barnabas to the Hebrews,' which is probably the * Epistle of Barnabas ' 
referred to in the Canon of Muratori (Hilgenfeld, /. c. 109). 


world, Let us make man after our image, and after our 

likeness.' 1 

'The prophets, having obtained grace from Him, 

prophesied concerning Him ; and He (since it behoved 

Him to appear in the flesh), that He might abolish death, 

and reveal the resurrection from the dead, endured 

(what and as He did), in order that He might fulfil the 

promise made unto the fathers, and by preparing a new 

people for Himself might show, whilst He dwelt on 

earth, that He, when He has raised mankind, will also 

judge them. Moreover, teaching Israel, and doing so 

great miracles and signs, He preached (the truth) to 

him, and greatly loved him. But when lie chose His 

own apostles who were to preach His gospel (He did so 

from among those) who were sinners above all sin, that 

He might show He came "not to call the righteous but 

sinners to repentance." Then He manifested himself 

to be the Son of God. For if He had not come in the 

flesh, how could men have been saved by beholding 

Him ? Since looking upon the sun which is to cease to 

exist, and is the work of His hands, their eyes are not 

able to bear his rays. The Son of God therefore came 

in the flesh with this view, that He might bring to a 

head the sum of their sins, who had persecuted His 

prophets to the death. For this purpose, then, He 

endured.' 'He himself willed thus to suffer, for it 

was necessary that He should suffer on the tree. For, 

says he who prophesies regarding Him : " Spare my 

soul from the sword, fasten my flesh with nails, for 

the assemblies of the wicked have risen, up against 

me.'" 2 

The sufferings of Christ, necessary for salvation, 
were * foreshown ' by the prophets. Pre-eminently 
among the numerous references to Messianically inter- 

1 We give the text contained in The Ante-Nicene Christian Library, 
where the Codex Sinaiticus and the edition of Ililgenfeld have been con- 

2 Barn, xii.-xiv., v. vi. ; comp. Ps. xxii. 21, 17, cix. 120. 


pre ted passages in Scripture is that about the servant 
of God slain like a lamb, which with the offering up 
of Isaac is enumerated among the types of Christ's 
vicarious sacrifice on the cross. Barnabas finds the 
Messianic cross frequently referred to in the Old 
Testament, by the side of the brazen serpent. Those 
who have been ' renewed ' by the remission of sins, 
thus procured, have been ' refashioned,' they belong 
to the ' second fashioning ' or creation of ' these last 
days.' This new creation is described as given over 
to Christ before the foundation of the earth, and 
as an effect of the Spirit of God, implied to have 
been brought down from heaven by the Angel- 
Messiah, who will return after 6,000 years, when the 
finishing of all things (the Millennium) will take place. 
Like the cross, baptism has been prefigured in the Old 
Testament. God has described both ' the water (of 
baptism) and the cross ' in the first Psalm, as also by 
Zephaniah and Ezechiel. 1 

Like Apollos in the Epistle to the Hebrews of Alex- 
dria, to whom Barnabas seems to have addressed this 
Epistle, a more perfect knowledge, a ' more profound 
gift,' or ' the engrafted spiritual gift,' a gnosis is referred 
to, which Christ lias ' put within ' the newly created or 
newborn, in those who are called the possessors of ' the 
Spirit poured forth from the rich Lord of love,' who 
brought it. The ' knowledge hid in parables,' about 
8 things present or future,' the readers of the Epistle 
cannot understand, and this ' wisdom and understanding 
of secret things ' has been ' placed in us ' by our blessed 

1 Barn. v. vii. xi. xii. vi. xv. ; Vs. i. 3-6 ; Zepli. iii. 19; Ezek. xlvii. 
12. The many irreconcilable quotations from the Old Testament, and later 
from the earliest records of the words of Jesus, seem to he best explained by 
the assumption that a gnostically reformed version of the Scriptures formed 
part of the Scripture-collection of the Essenes and Therapeuts, which was 
utilised, as was the Septuagint, in the composition of our Gospels and of 
Pauline Epistles, according to Eusebius. Comp. TIebr. vii. 27, ix. 3, 4, and 
the quotations in the writings of Justin Martyr. 


Lord. Barnabas asserts that these mysteries were not 
made known to Israelites proper, or Hebrews, who were 
' abandoned,' for ' as it is written ' (in some Gospel) 
' many are called but few are chosen.' x 

Essenic are the following doctrines in the Epistle 
of Barnabas. The Angel-Messiah as personal and abo- 
riginal type of humanity ; the distinction between a spiri- 
tual and a material world, as of a way of light from 
a way of darkness ; the distinction of a celestial from 
a terrestrial Messiah ; the figurative interpretation of 
Scripture ; the secret tradition or gnosis of the Initiated, 
connected with the Spirit of God brought by the Messiah ; 
the abolition of bloody sacrifices, and the typical inter- 
pretation of those commanded by the law ; the injunc- 
tion to be spiritually minded, as a ' perfect temple to 
God ' in which he dwells and prophesies ; the injunctions 
not ' to stretch forth the hand ' or to swear ; to give 
alms ; to ' communicate in all things ' with the neigh- 
bour, not calling things one's own, inasmuch as ' par- 
takers in common of things which are incorruptible ' 
ought also to be ' of those things which are corruptible ' ; 
not to be hasty with the tongue, and ' as far as possible ' 
to be ' pure in the soul ' ; to ' preserve ' what has been 
received (the secret things), 'neither adding to it or 
taking from it ' ; to ' pacify ' those that contend ' by 
bringing them together ' ; to ' confess ' one's sins, not 
going ' to prayer with an evil conscience.' 

Essenic is the injunction not, ' by retiring apart, to 
live a solitary life,' as if ' already fully justified,' but to 
come together ' in one place,' making ' common inquiry ' 
concerning what tends to the general welfare. Essenic 
in the Epistle of Barnabas is also the water-baptism as 
a symbol of spiritual purity, and the rigid keeping of 
the Sabbath, as a type of the seventh thousand of years, 
of ' the day of the Lord ' which shall be * as a thousand 
years.' The return of the Son of God will lead to the 

1 Barn. ix. I. xvii. vi. it. Matt. xx. 1G; xxii. 14; comp. 4 Esdr. viii. 3. 


judgment, to cosmical changes, and to the 'beginning of 
the eighth day;' that is, 'a beginning of another world.' 
The eighth day was by Barnabas held to be a memorial 
of the resurrection of Jesus which took place on that 
day, or the first day of the week. Nothing is said of its 
having been ' the third day according to the Scriptures,' 
but this is indirectly implied by the comparison drawn 
between the death of Jesus and the slaying of the ram 
or lamb in the place of Isaac, with which the slaying 
of the Paschal lamb by Moses seemed to be connected. 
We are perhaps justified in regarding the Christology 
of Barnabas as identical with that of Paul, and to explain 
the separation of the former from the latter exclusively 
by the dissension about admitting the Gentiles. Yet by 
the denial of the Davidic descent of Jesus, Barnabas 
taught a different doctrine than that in Paul's Epistles. 
Moreover, he believed either, like Cerinthus, in a 
double Messianic personality, one angelic one human, 
or, like Simon Magus, in a mere apparent humanity 
of Jesus. It is probable enough that both Paul and 
Barnabas were pupils of Gamaliel, as reported. We 
tried to show that Gamaliel as a leading Eabbi stood 
in connection with that Essenic and Medo-Chaldsean 
or, Magian tradition of which the Book of Daniel is the 
earliest known exponent. Barnabas, the Palestinian Es- 
sene, and Paul, the preacher of Therapeutic doctrines, had 
this in common, that both regarded Jesus as the Angel of 
God who can pardon transgressions, and whose resurrec- 
tion was typified. Passing over as perhaps unhistorical the 
account in the Acts about the first journey of Paul and 
Barnabas from Antioch to Jerusalem, of which Paul says 
nothing, the well-attested facts remain, that Barnabas, at 
the bidding of the Twelve or not, introduced Paul to the 
Church at Antioch ; that Barnabas and Peter were at 
Antioch by Paul called dissembling Jews ; that when 
seventeen years after his conversion to the faith of Stephen 
(the Therapeut) Paul avms introduced by Barnabas to the 


Apostles at Jerusalem, they were all afraid of him, but 
recognised Paul and Barnabas as Apostles among the 
Gentiles ; and that at Antioch the contention between Paul 
and Barnabas was ' so sharp, that they parted asunder,' 
and that Barnabas and Mark returned to Cyprus. 

Barnabas seems to have stood nearer to the ' John ' of 
the Apocalypse, to which the Epistle refers indirectly, 
than to Paul, to whose writings there is not any direct 
reference. Similarity of expression, and such views as 
angels of Satan, can be easily traced back to a common 
source, such as the teaching of Gamaliel. Unlike the 
Esdras of the Apocalypse, Barnabas wrote in the time of 
Domitian, whom he regarded as 4 the last stumbling-block.' 
After him he expected the Beloved of God to come to 
his inheritance, at the end of 6,000 years from the 
creation of the world. Then 'the temple of God shall 
be built in glory, in the name of the Lord.' 1 

The Epistles of John. 

The distinction between a true and a false know- 
ledge or gnosis can be shown to have been already 
made in the first century, and to have centred in 
the denial of the human nature of Christ-Jesus. The 
Docetics of the second century stood in direct con- 
nection with the Essenes whose doctrines were similar 
to those of Simon Magus and Barnabas. We regard this 
false doctrine of the Apostolic and of the after- Apostolic 
age as the original secret doctrine of the Essenes. 
It was in so far opposed by Paul, as he clearly acknow- 
ledged, at least in the Epistle to the Eomans, that the same 
Jesus Christ or Christ-Jesus was Son of God according 
to the spirit of holiness, and was son of David according 
to the flesh. On that basis Paul's doctrine was recog- 
nised by the Church. 

The Apostle John, or rather John the presbyter, as 

1 Barn. iv. xvi. This settles the year 97 for its composition ; comp. 
Hilgenfeld, I. c. 544, Note 1. 


lie called himself, wrote his three Epistles probably from 
Epliesus, and perhaps before the destruction of Jeru- 
salem, since he writes, ' it is the last time,' which may 
be referred to the Jewish Church and nation. John's 
principal object is to oppose those who in ' the spirit of 
Antichrist,' and as ' Antichrists,' denied in those Apo- 
stolic days that Christ has come 'in the flesh.' His con- 
temporaries, Barnabas and Cerinthus, distinguished 
between Jesus and Christ, thus denying the presence in 
all ages of the Spirit of God in mankind. The Apostle 
calls this the denial of ' the Father and the Son.' 

' The false teachers went out from us, but were 
not of us.' Thus it seems to be implied that the 
Essenes had separated from the recognised Judaism 
ever since they formed the third or independent 
party among the Jews, which they did at least about 
150 years before the birth of Jesus. As they had 
not continued with the Pharisees who sat in the seat of 
Moses, so they had not continued with those who, like 
John, had 4 seen and heard,' who had • looked upon,' and 
whose ' hands handled,' the bodily manifestation or ap- 
pearing, that is, the incarnation of ' the Word of Life.' 
That Word or Logos is by John described as a spiritual 
substance, as the seed or sperma, which if it \ abide ' in 
man, causes him to be ' born of [from] God,' and prevents 
him from sinning. 1 

The false teachers, the ' many Antichrists ' who had 
even then arisen, that is, in the Apostolic age, are de- 
scribed by the Apostle as if they were Essenes. What 
he writes against their doctrine of Christ confirms the 
fact we tried to establish, that the secret tradition of 
the Essenes included the doctrine of an Angel who 
would be manifested on earth as Messiah, but not as a 
human embodiment of the Word or Spirit of God. The 
very commencement of the First Epistle of John shows 
that the Apostle found it necessary to testify, that he 

1 1 John ii. 18-22 ; iv. 3 ; iii. 9. 


and his fellow-workers had seen Jesns Christ with their 
eyes, not as a bodiless spirit, as a phantom, but as a 
human reality, that their hands had ' handled ' the Word 
of Life, Jesus Christ, the Son of God. 

Like James, John does not regard the Word in the 
heart of man, 'his seed,' as a new spiritual faculty or new 
gift of God, which had come to man after the incarnation 
and sacrificial death of Jesus, according to Paul's decla- 
ration. The Word of Life is ' the engrafted word ' of 
which James writes that it is ' able to save the soul ; ' 
it is ' the word of God ' which in the First Epistle of Peter 
is described as 'the imperishable seed,' living and abiding, 
by which man is born again, and which Word Peter had 
preached by the gospel. Neither John, Peter, nor James 
distinguishes this Word, or Christ, from ' the spirit of 
promise,' which came not till after the atonement 
by the death of Jesus on the cross, according to Paul's 
doctrine. 1 

The heretics against whom John writes his Epistles, 
especially his First Epistle, denied that Christ had come 
in flesh and blood ; they held that he came ' in water 
only,' that is, that Christ or the Spirit of God was not 
in Jesus at his birth, but descended and rested on him 
at his baptism. The Apostle declares in opposition to 
these false teachers, that Christ came also ' in the blood.' 
Those whom the Apostle John calls Antichrists dis- 
tinguished Christ from Jesus, as Cerinthus and the 
writer of the Apocalypse of ' John ' has done. These 
teachers of a new and false doctrine asserted to possess 
a knowledge or gnosis of Jesus Christ, but they kept 
not 'his commandments.' The contents of the First 
Epistle of John suggest with sufficient clearness, that 
this gnosis which the Apostle John opposes is the secret 
tradition of the Essenes. From this high probability 
we are led to conjecture that the Essenes denied Christ's 
coining in the flesh. This the writings of Philo con- 

1 I Peter i. 23 ; James i. 18, 21 ; Rom. x. 5-9. 


firm, who knew all about the Essenes, and held them 
in high estimation, even if he was not a Therapeutic 
Essene. Philo says nothing of a Messianic incarnation 
or atonement. Like Simon and apparently Barnabas, 
the Essenes denied the human nature of Christ-Jesus, 
regarding him as the Angel-Messiah, as absolutely super- 
natural, not as an incarnation of the Angel of God, but 
as One come down from heaven, ' apparently as man, 
yet not as man,' as ' Son of God, but not as Son of man.' 
It is also Essenic what John writes about the false 
gnostics in his time who hated their brethren. For 
the separatist Essenes, not the Therapeuts, with whom 
we connected Paul, hated their brethren the Gentiles, 
and denied that Christ is also ' a propitiation ' for the 
sins of the whole world. 1 

The false teachers in the time of the Apostle John 
held, like the Essenes, that they did not transgress 
against the law according to its literal interpretation, 
inasmuch as by a figurative and spiritual interpretation 
of the letter they considered themselves entitled to dis- 
regard the Commandments which the letter of the law 
imposed. By so doing they did not regard themselves 
as sinning ; they said that they had no sin. John 
opposes these Essenic gnostics by saying, that c the 
transgression of the law is sin,' that ' all unrighteousness 
is sin,' that i he that doeth sin is of the devil, because 
the devil sinneth from the beginning ; but that he that 
doeth righteousness is righteous, even as He [Jesus 
Christ] is righteous.' Every righteous man ' is of God.' 
Thus the Apostle John acknowledges the existence of 
the Word from the beginning, and of the devil from the 
beginning ; he regards neither as a personality, but he 
distinguishes ' the children of God ' from ' the children 
of the devil.' This spiritual dualism, of Oriental origin, 
was an apostolic doctrine. ' For this purpose the Son 

1 John v. 6; ii. 9, 11. 


of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works 
of the devil,' that is, of the evil spirit. 1 

' That which was from the beginning,' Christ, the 
Word or Spirit of God, was manifested in Jesus, in flesh 
and blood. God sent that Divine Power, God ' sent His 
Son as a propitiation for our sins.' As in the Angel, 
who can pardon sin, so in Jesus was the name or Spirit 
of God. Therefore he could not sin, he was ' begotten 
of God ' and ' sinneth not,' for ' he that hath been 
begotten of God, he keepeth [preserveth] himself, and 
the wicked one [the evil spirit] toucheth him not.' 
God abode with Jesus, and the love of him was perfected 
in him. God had given to Jesus, as he has given to 
us, ' of his Spirit,' and therein Jesus knew and ' know 
we, that we abide in him and he in us.' 

' This is the witness : that God gave to us eternal 
life, and this life is in His Son.' The Apostle does not 
say that this life, the Word of Life, ' that which was 
from the beginning,' was the premundane Son of God ; 
but he says that this anointing power of God is ' in ' his 
Son, in Jesus the Anointed. Thus John's testimony on 
the true doctrine of Christ is in perfect harmony with 
the confession of Peter, that the man Jesus of Nazareth 
has by God been anointed ' with the Holy Ghost and 
with power.' In this sense John testifies ' that the 
Father hath sent the Son as Saviour of the world.' 
Jesus is the Son of God because his Spirit or Word 
abode ' in him and he in God.' So does God abide in 
every man who confesses this ; every such believer 
abides in God. ' He that believeth on the Son of God 
hath the witness in him.' 2 

The Divine Sonship is abiding communion and life 
in the Spirit of God. That Word or Spirit which abides 
in Jesus, the Son of God, is God ; God is a Spirit. In 

1 1 John i. 8 ; iii. 4-10 ; comp. for the denial of siu by Gnostics, Clem. 
Alex. Excerpt a ex-propheticis, §15; Opp. p. 903; Hilgeniield, I.e. 688. 

2 1 John iii. 5; iv. 10-15; v. 18; v. 10. 



an evidently genuine passage which is omitted, purposely 
or not, in many ancient manuscripts, the Spirit of God 
in man is clearly indicated to be the Father and also to 
be the Son : ' Whosoever denieth the Son, neither hath 
he the Father ; he that confesseth the Son, hath the 
Father also.' Again : ' If that which ye heard from the 
beginning abide in you, ye also shall abide in the Son 
and in the Father.' Therefore the Apostle writes : ' We 
are in the true One, in his Son Jesus Christ. This is 
the true God, and eternal life.' 1 It was necessary to 
omit these words after the introduction of the doctrine 
of the three eternal Persons, of which the Bible knows 
nothing. The Word which was in the beginning, which 
was in mankind, and also in Jesus, is the Father. Its 
bodily manifestation in Jesus is called the Son, who 
after his resurrection became an advocate with the 

Nothing is said in the Epistles of John about a Per- 
sonal Word who, as an angel, was with God before the 
creation of the world. The Word of Life which was in 
the beginning can abide in man ; his word, his seed, 
the incorruptible seed of the word of God, the engrafted 
word, is able to save the soul. Those who have an 
'anointing (a Christ) from the Holy One,' from the 
Father, require ' no new commandment,' they know all 
things,' they need not be taught a figurative interpre- 
tation of the Scriptures, a gnosis or deeper and secret 
knowledge. The Word which the readers of this 
Epistle ' have heard ' is ' the old commandment,' which 
they * had from the beginning.' Also in the time of 
Moses that Word was in man's heart that he might do it. 

But { the law and the prophets until John,' him 
included, had prophesied about the future coming of 
that Word to the heart of man, so that the true light, 
although actually in man, could not shine. It was 
Jesus who showed by his words and works that the 

1 1 John ii. 23, 24 ; v. 20. 


Spirit of God is in man, that ' the kingdom of heaven is 
already come.' The Scribes and Pharisees ' shut up the 
kingdom of heaven against men,' but some entered in 
nevertheless, although by force ; they had to press into 
it, for it suffered violence. Now, after the days of John, 
and since the days of Jesus, who drove out evil spirits 
by the Spirit of God, as did others in Israel, his be- 
loved disciple, the Apostle John, could write ' a new 
commandment, which thing is true in him (in Jesus 
Christ) and in you, because the darkness is passing away, 
and the true light now shineth.' x 

Jesus did follow the promptings of his Word, of 
his seed, therefore he sinned not, and he was the 
Saviour of the world, a propitiation for the sins of men. 
Christ, the Word or Spirit of God, did verily come in 
flesh and blood ; that power of God became incarnate 
in the man Jesus, who by his life, not by his sacrificial 
death, became a propitiation for the sins of mankind. 
Because the reality of his blood was denied, John writes 
that ' the blood of Jesus cleanseth us from all sin.' This 
is not a figurative expression, but a mysterious reality. 
Whosoever has the Word of Life, the Spirit of God, 
abidingly in him, is by that light of God enabled to 
' walk in the light as he is in the light,' and ' he cannot 
sin.' For such there is no condemnation, nor need of 
another Saviour than God himself, inasmuch as that 
spiritual fellowship or communion with God ' cleanseth 
us from all sin.' That saving communion with God is 
the direct result of our walking in the light as God is 
in the light. Because the great mystery of ' God mani- 
fested in the flesh ' was by false teachers in those days 
denied, because Christ, the Word of God, was declared 
not to have come in flesh and blood, that is, because the 
presence of the Word or Spirit of God in man was 
denied ; therefore the Apostle writes, that c the blood ' 
of him in whom is no sin, that is, of him whom God had 

' 1 John ii. 20, 7, 8. 
z 2 


anointed with his Spirit, that the blood of Jesus Christ 
the Son of God cleanse th us from all sin. If the truth 
is in us, and ' if we confess our sins,' then God ' is faith- 
ful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us 
from all unrighteousness.' Thus it is God himself, he 
who ' is light,' God manifested in flesh and blood, who 
' cleanseth us from all sin,' who is our Saviour. But 
because Jesus, by his merit, is the perfect organ of 
God's spirit, is the incarnation of God, therefore what 
is said of the Father can be said of the Son also. It is 
God who cleanseth us from all sin and who gives to us 
eternal life. This forgiveness of sin, this life ' is in his 
Son,' in Jesus the Christ. 

In order to teach by word and deed the old com- 
mandment, that the Word of God is in man's heart that 
he may do it — which commandment had become a dead 
letter ; in order to teach the new commandment, the 
thing which is true in him and in mankind ; in order 
tli at the self-imposed darkness might pass away and the 
God-granted true light might shine, Jesus had to tread 
a forbidden path and to lay down his life for us. Thus 
he enabled us to perceive the love of God. For God 
was in him, and God is love. The followers of Jesus 
ought — if necessary — to lay down their lives ' for the 

In the Epistles of the Apostle John not a word is 
said about a sacrificial or vicarious death of Jesus on 
the cross as the Lamb of God. Like the Epistle of 
James, the Epistles of John exclude the Paulinic doc- 
trine of atonement, as found in the ' Gospel after John.' 

If Paul had already developed in his Epistles the 
doctrine of Christ's atonement, as a necessary prelimi- 
nary and condition of the coming of the spirit of pro- 
mise ; if Paul had declared, before the composition of 
the Epistles of John, that the words of Moses about the 
Word in the heart of man were a prophecy of Christ's 
resurrection, then the Apostle John opposed not only the 


false doctrines of the Essenes, but also this doctrine of 

Most Gnostics of the Apostolic and after-apostolic 
age agreed in denying, that Christ, whom they regarded 
as the Angel-Messiah, came in the flesh. But only 
Cerinthus and his followers, as later Basilides, believed 
in a merely temporary abiding of Christ in Jesus, in a 
double personality of the Messiah, distinguishing the 
terrestrial Jesus from the celestial Christ. Consequently 
all Gnostics excluded a corporeal resurrection of Jesus 
Christ, of which even Paul said nothing. This new 
or dualistic form of gnosis, which Paul attacked in his 
Epistle to the Colossians, paved the way for the unli- 
mited co-operation of Paul and the twelve Apostles. 
Because of this distinction between the Angel Christ and 
the man Jesus, all Apostles would have opposed the 
' Eevelation of John,' as also the accounts transmitted 
to us about the corporeal resurrection of Jesus. These 
narratives seem to have been invented, not before the 
composition of the fourth Gospel, perhaps with a view 
to undermine the doctrine of two contemporaneous 
Messianic personalities, and to establish the belief in 
the Oneness of Jesus Christ. 


The conception of a non-material or spiritual from 
a material world, the cosmic dualism, probably of East- 
Iranian origin, was in course of time connected with a 
severe mode of life, with an asceticism which prevailed 
on the Ganges and on the Euphrates, and of which 
there is no trace among the East-Iranians or Zoroas- 
trians. Gautama-Buddha, the preacher of a ' tradition 
from beyond,' from a supermundane world, was re- 
garded as one of the incarnations of the first of seven 


Archangels, of Serosh, the vicar of God, and the first 
among the co-Creators of the universe. The proved 
connection of Parsism and Buddhism with Essenism 
led us to the assumption that the Essenes expected as 
Messiah an incarnate angel, like Buddha, the virgin- 
son, and that they denied his birth in the flesh by- 
natural means. This hypothesis we found confirmed 
by what we know about John the Baptist, the Ashai or 
bather, the Essai or Essene. So mysterious was the ap- 
parition of this celestial Messiah among men supposed 
to be, that Philo, probably an Essene, abstains from 
even referring to a theory on the subject. 6 The Arch- 
angelic Word of God,' the ' Highpriest of the profession,' 
the * second God,' had appeared to Jacob and others, 
but the idea is never expressed by Philo, that ' the most 
ancient Son of God ' would come in the flesh, either as 
son of a virgin, like Buddha, or otherwise. Yet the 
connection with Philo of Stephen, Paul, and Apollos, 
the first proclaimers of the doctrine that Christ had 
become incarnate in Jesus, leads to the almost provable 
assumption that Philo felt bound to keep back some- 
thing about the Messianic expectations of the Essenes. 
If they expected an Angel-Messiah, they were by a 
special oath bound not to reveal these expectations to 
the uninitiated. Philo certainly did not, any more than 
John the Baptist or Josephus, regard his contemporary 
Jesus as the Messiah, but Elkesai the Essene did. 

The Essenic doctrine of an Angel-Messiah, which 
can be proved to have prevailed at the end of the Apo- 
stolic age, must also have been recognised by the Initia- 
ted among the Essenes in the time of John the Baptist 
or Essene, since they were bound to transmit their doc- 
trines in no ' other way ' than they had « received them.' 
Even in the fourth century, Epiphanius could attest that 
the Essenes had not changed in anything. When John 
sent the deputation to Jesus, he wanted to know, whether 
Jesus was ' he that should come,' the Tathagata of 


Buddhists, the Angel-Messiah. The answer of Jesus, 
when connected with other recorded sayings of his, 
implies that he did not regard himself as an Angel, and 
that he attributed the works which he did to the pre- 
sence of the Spirit of God in man, which John announced 
as future. John was a Gnostic, which word has the same 
meaning as Buddhist. 

The gnosis or deeper knowledge of the Essenes is 
of Eastern origin, and centred in the doctrine of an 
Angel-Messiah, of which there is no trace in any of those 
portions of Hebrew Scriptures which were possibly 
written before the exportation to Babylon, nor in the 
first three Gospels. We have traced this Oriental and 
Essenic gnosis, about the Angel-Messiah, in the Book of 
Daniel and in several Jewish and Christian Scriptures 
connected with the same. The most important expo- 
nents of the new Messianic doctrine are the speech of 
Stephen, the writings of Paul and Apollos, the Revela- 
tion of John, not the Apostle, and the Epistle of Barna- 
bas. But they not all followed Simon Magus in denying 
that Christ came really in the flesh. 

The Oriental and Essenic gnosis of pre-Christian and 
Christian times, inasfar as it regards the Angel-Messiah, 
was acknowledged by the Midrashim, the Targums, and 
the Talmud. It was represented by John the Baptist, 
opposed by Jesus, yet applied to the latter by Stephen 
and Paul. The Apostle of the Gentiles coupled the new 
Messianic doctrine with the Therapeutic principle of uni- 
versality , for which reason he was opposed by the Gentile- 
excluding or separatist Essenes. To these seem to have 
belonged Simon Magus and Barnabas, for also the latter 
in fact denied the human nature of Jesus, as did the 
false teachers against whom the Apostle John wrote his 
Pirst Epistle. Paul promulgated a Gnostic, Essenic, and 
essentially Buddhistic doctrine of Christ, whilst opposing 
that form of gnosis which Cerinthus proclaimed, of which 
the Revelation of John is the fullest exponent. Though 


issued forth from Judaism, Christianity applied to 
Jesus, without his authority, a Messianic doctrine un- 
known to and excluded by the Old Testament. 

The fourth Gospel, still unknown to Papias, whilst 
he knew the First Epistle of John, was assimilated in 
form to the latter, with the intention of establishing 
Apostolic authority for the Gospel of the Angeh Messiah 
and the Lamb. 

The Twelve and Paul agreed to work together on 
the understanding that the kingdom of heaven is the 
rule of the Spirit of God in mankind, and that by this 
Divine power Jesus was of God anointed, was made 
Christ. Thus the difference between the doctrine of the 
anointed man and that of the anointed Angel was not 
allowed to stand in the way of the practical purposes, 
the uniting influences, of Christianity. 

General Conclusion. — The Roman Church. 

Two different dates are given in the Gospels for the 
crucifixion. According to the first three Gospels it 
is the 15th Nisan, not the day when the paschal lamb 
was killed, but the day following the 14th Nisan, on 
which latter day, according to the fourth Gospel, the 
crucifixion took place. 1 This date, and consequently 
the following ' third day,' the 16th Nisan for the resur- 
rection, Paul must have had in his mind when he wrote 
about the ' passover slain for us,' and about ' the first- 
fruits of them that slept,' evidently regarding Jesus 
Christ as the antitype both of the paschal lamb and of 
the paschal omer. ' The Gospel after John ' is alone in 
harmony with Paul's Epistles, since the resurrection-day, 

1 John xviii. 28; comp. xiii. 1 ; xviii. 30: xix. 14. The day of the 
Passover began with the evening of the 14th ; Eus. H.E. vii. 32, 18. 


the first day of the week, is here the third day, whilst 
that same ' first day of the week ' is the second day 
after the crucifixion according to the first three Gospels. 
In the latter the narrative of the crucifixion excludes 
the conception that Jesus, on the day of His death, 
fulfilled in a literal sense the type of the 14th, and by 
His resurrection the type of the 16th Nisan, according to 
a figurative interpretation of the law. Yet in these 
same Gospels the resurrection-day is referred to as the 
third day. It is obvious that the first day of the week 
cannot have been the third after the 15th of the month, 
and also after the 14th of the month in the same year. 

We are therefore led to assume at the outset that 
the passages in the first three Gospels about the resur- 
rection on the third day may have been inserted after 
the publication of the fourth Gospel, where alone the 
narrative of the crucifixion harmonises with the state- 
ments of Paul about the resurrection on c the third day 
according to the Scriptures.' 

It can be rendered probable that this final re- 
vision of the Gospels was a necessary consequence of 
the paschal dispute which broke out in the middle of 
the second century, when Bishop Polycarp, the asso- 
ciate of the Apostle John and of other apostles, opposed 
at Eome, in the presence of Pope Anicetus, the Easter-rite 
of the Western churches, as established by Eoman pres- 
byterial tradition, and as supported, in the main point, 
by the fourth Gospel, which forms part of our Canon, 
but was not then referred to. 

Paul distinguishes between the Jewish and the 
Christian passover as between the prophesying type 
and the fulfilling antitype, that is, he connects the slaying 
of the Jewish paschal lamb with the crucifying of Jesus 
as the slain passover or paschal lamb of the Christians. 
Thus Paul prepared the way for the separation of the 
Jewish from the Christian Passover, as we find it in the 
account of the Last Supper in the Gospel after Luke. 


The Passover or paschal supper having been made 
ready, Jesus sat down, and the Apostles with Him, round 
the table on which the paschal lamb was served. ' And 
He said unto them : " Heartily have I desired to eat 
this Passover with you before I suffer. For I say unto 
you, I will not any more eat it, until it be fulfilled in 
the Kingdom of God.'" Though not clearly stated, 1 
it is implied that Jesus did not refer to a mere spiritual 
partaking of the Passover, but that He did eat the lamb, 
on this final occasion, before His death, which would be 
the fulfilment of the typical Passover, and thus the 
beginning of the Kingdom of God. For the kingdom of 
' the spirit of promise ' would not come till after His 
death, as Paul had declared. ' And He took a cup, 
gave thanks and said : take this and divide it among 
yourselves, for I say unto you, I will not henceforth 
drink of the fruit of the vine, until the Kingdom of 
God shall come.' 

By reporting that Jesus spoke these words about 
the fruit of the vine at the end of the supper, not before 
it, as it is recorded in the first Gospel, the third Gospel 
implies that Jesus did not Himself drink of the cup. 
The expression ' fruit of the vine ' seems to have been 
changed from ' wine.' For the cup contained wine, to 
which Paul never referred, and not merely ' liquor of 
grapes,' which was equally forbidden to the Nasirites, 
as also, presumably, to the Essenes. Eating the lamb 
and drinking the wine at the Passover was an institu- 
tion so contrary to Essenic principles and rites, that 
the Essenes, whom Philo calls the first allegorists, must 
have figuratively interpreted this ordinance of the 
Law, giving it a merely spiritual sense. An exceptional 
permission to eat meat and drink wine at the paschal 
meal cannot be assumed to have been granted to the 
Essenes. 2 By implying that Jesus did not drink of the 

1 In Matt. xxvi. 21, 26 it is written: 'and as they [the disciples only?] 
were eating, he said.' 

2 According to Justin Martyr (Apol. i. 65 comp. 13) the cup of the Last 


cup, the third Gospel has approximated Jesus to Essenic 
rites. Thus a mystic meaning has been given to the 
cup, apparently connecting the ' cup of blessing,' the 
third cup of the Jewish paschal supper, with the words 
attributed to Jesus in the first Gospel, about the cup 
which He was about to drink, the cup of His last suf- 
fering, which He prayed might pass from Him, and 
which the Apostles were not able to drink. In Mark 
these words are amplified by a reference to the baptism 
(of the Holy Ghost) with which Jesus was baptized. 1 

After having narrated the Jewish Passover which 
Jesus ate with His disciples, the third Gospel gives a 
separate account of a new sacrament instituted by 
Jesus, which is almost literally reproduced from Paul's 
Epistle. It is here clearly implied that the paschal 
lamb is henceforth, after that Jesus had eaten of it, not 
to be eaten any more, since its typical meaning was the 
next day to be fulfilled by the death of Jesus on 
the cross, as the slain Passover or paschal lamb of the 
Christians, as Lamb of God. The bread is to be eaten 
' in remembrance ' of Him, of His body given for them, 
and as (the symbol of) His body. In like manner the 
cup, the drinking of which is not referred to, is ex- 
plained as (the symbol of) ' the new covenant ' in His 
blood, shed for them. According to the Scriptures 
every covenant required blood, and as the old covenant 
was confirmed by the blood of the paschal lamb, so it is 
implied that the new covenant would on the following 
day be confirmed by the blood of Jesus as the Lamb of 
God, in a non-literal but imputed fulfilment of the law. 
It is obvious that the accounts of the Last Supper in 
the three Gospels are based on the supposition that Jesus 
was not crucified on the day of the slaying of the paschal 
lamb, on the 14th Nisan. Yet this is implied by the 

Supper, like the cup at the love feasts of the Christians, may have contained 
* wine and water,' in the middle of the second century. 

1 Matt, xx. 22; xxvi. 39; Mark x. 38; comp. Martyr. Polyc. 14. 


fourth Gospel, which gives no account of the Last Sup- 
per, because such narrative in such a place would have 
led to inextricable confusion. Instead of it, the rite of 
feet-washing is introduced. 

Paul states in his account of the Last Supper that 
the memorial rite was instituted by Jesus, not in the 
night of the Passover, but ' in the night in which He 
was betrayed,' which, according to the fourth Gospel, 
was the night from the 13th to the 14th Nisan. The 
Apostle clearly implies, by other statements, that Jesus 
rose, visible or not, on 'the third day according to the 
Scriptures,' that His death as the slain Passover took 
place as antitype of the paschal lamb on the 14th Nisan, 
and His resurrection as ' the first fruits ' and < the first 
born ' took place, as antitype of the paschal firstfruits, on 
the 16th Nisan. It is therefore certain that Paul refers 
to the 13th Nisan as to the night of the betrayal, and 
the same is implied in the fourth Gospel. 

We assume here that Paul regarded Jesus as the 
incarnate Angel of God, or the spiritual Eock which 
followed the Israelites, in harmony with the almost 
certain Essenic expectation of an Angel-Messiah, and 
that the twelve Apostles must have regarded Him as 
the promised anointed man. It is quite possible that 
Paul's implied doctrine of Jesus as the paschal lamb was 
derived, like his Messianic doctrine, from the Essenes. 

It has now to be shown that the Essenes had in 
the first century a Passover-rite similar to that which 
prevailed in all Christian churches after the Council of 
Nice, when the paschal dispute was finally decided in 
favour of the Eoman-Alexandrian Easter-rite. 

Eusebius connects the Therapeutic ' festival of our 
Saviour's passion,' described by Philo, the contempo- 
rary of Jesus, with what was still in the fourth century 
1 in vogue among ' the Christians, that is, with ' the 
customs that are observed by us alone at the present 
day, particularly the vigils of the great festival.' 


According to Philo, the Therapeuts, whom Eusebius 
reckons among the aboriginal Christians, were accus- 
tomed to pass special days of their Easter festival ' in 
fasting 1 and watching, and in the study of the Divine 
Word.' Now, this is what the Christians in the fourth 
century continued to do, as Eusebius testifies, who 
declares that ' the same customs ' which were observed 
by the Christians ' alone,' in implied contradistinction 
to the customs of the Jews, had prevailed in the first 
century among the Therapeuts, as described by Philo. 

It is thus proved that in the fourth century, and 
after the decisions of the First General Council, the 
Christian Church recognised the connection of its 
Easter-rite, as then universally accepted, with that of 
the Therapeutic Essenes of the first century. From 
this it necessarily follows that the Christian ' vigils of 
the great festival of our Lord's passion,' to which 
Eusebius refers, corresponded with a similar fasting 
and watching of the Therapeuts, as practised by them 
before the middle of the first century, that is, probably 
not later than a few years after the crucifixion of 
Jesus, and as possibly also practised by Essenes in pre- 
Christian times. 

Philo wrote a treatise ' on the festivals ' of the law, 
as figuratively interpreted and mystically observed by 
those who were ' in the habit of turning plain stories 
into allegory,' that is, by the Therapeuts, the sect 
which ' first pre-eminently studied ' the ' invisible sense 
that lies enveloped in the expressions, the soul.' Philo 
shows that the feast of the 14th Nisan, when ' the 
people ' of the Hebrews offer sacrifice, which the The- 
rapeuts did not, was by these Essenes regarded as 
'figuratively' representing 'the purification of the soul.' 

1 If Jesus has spoken the words attributed to Him in the Gospel after 
Matthew (ix. 14, 15), He has sanctioned the fasting, which originally was 
a rite of the disciples of John the Baptist or Essene, as distinguished ex- 
pressly from that of the disciples of Jesus. 


On that day they fulfilled ' their hereditary custom 
with prayer and songs of praise.' Instead of eating 
the lamb on the 14th Nisan, they connected that day 
with a fulfilment to which the type of the paschal lamb 
pointed, and to which fulfilment, or deeper and real 
meaning of this rite, they looked forward. They ex- 
pected a fulfilling antitype of the paschal lamb. Did 
the lamb without blemish refer to it which, according 
to the Law of Moses, was to be offered to God on the 
third day after the eating of the paschal lamb ? 

The great Alexandrian mystic — probably himself a 
Therapeut — then describes the meaning of the 15th 
Nisan, as a day of ' cheerfulness and giving of thanks 
to God,' as the first day of unleavened bread, the day 
of * the great migration ' which the Israelites made from 
Egypt, the memorial-clay of ' the gratitude due for 
their deliverance.' He does not refer to the ' holy con- 
vocation ' which the law orders on this day. Then 
Philo explains the subsequent festival, named ' the 
sheaf,' which Moses ordered to be solemnised on the 
16th Nisan. On this clay of the offering of the paschal 
omer, on the third day after the slaying of the paschal 
lamb, the Therapeuts seem to have held the ' holy con- 
vocation ' which the law ordains on the day before. 
Philo calls the 16th the festival of ' the solemn as- 
sembly,' which festival was ' the prelude of another 
festival of still greater importance,' of the clay of Pente- 
cost, or of the fiftieth day, which was reckoned by the 
Therapeuts, and according to the law, from the 16th 
Nisan. There can therefore be no doubt that the The- 
rapeuts regarded the 16th Nisan, the day of the offering 
of the paschal omer, and of the lamb 'without ble- 
mish,' the day of their holy convocation or ' solemn 
assembly,' as the day when they expected, in the early 
hours of the morning, the fulfilling antitype of the 
lamb offered to God the third day after the 14th 


Nisan, when ' the people,' but not the Therapeuts, con- 
tinued to slay the paschal lamb, only as a memorial of 
the past, not as a type of the future. 

This great festival, the day of ' the solemn assembly,' 
preceded by solemn night-watches, not only by Thera- 
peuts and early Christians, but also by all Christians 
after the Nicene Council, is what Eusebius calls * the 
great festival of our Lord's passion,' which was pre- 
ceded by vigils. Of course Eusebius refers to the day 
of the resurrection which, as will be pointed out pre- 
sently, had just been fixed by the council, for all 
churches, to be solemnised on the Sunday after the 
14th Nisan, in harmony with the Koman-Alexandrian 
rite. The Church historian might have more correctly 
called it ' the great festival of our Lord's resurrection,' 
but already Tertullian had called both days, the day 
of the crucifixion and the day of the resurrection, ' the 
day of the Passover.' 1 Without taking cognizance of 
the days of the month, Eusebius is bent upon connecting 
the solemnities in Christian Churches on the holy even 
of Saturday before Easter with the corresponding vigils 
of the Therapeuts and early Christians. 

Philo did not designate the Therapeuts as * Christians,' 
and we shall see that this name for the so-called disciples 
of Jesus was preceded by that of Essaioi, by which name 
the Alexandrian contemporary of Jesus designates those 
whom Josephus calls Essenes. Also the Jewish his- 
torian does not yet know ' Christians,' or any party 
distinguished from Essenes as from Pharisees and Sad- 
ducees. The connection of Christians and Essenes, 
darkly implied by Philo and Josephus, is clearly con- 
firmed by Eusebius. He insists on the identity of the 
Therapeutic Easter-rites and of those of the Christian 
Church, that is of the ' original practices handed down 
from the Apostles.' By this statement he would force 
us to conclude that the twelve Apostles sanctioned the 

1 Tert. de Or at. 14; de Cor. Mil. 3. 


Easter-rite as all Christians observed it after the Council 
of Nice, and that the Apostles either were Essenes, or 
had accepted the ' hereditary custom ' of the Therapeuts 
respecting the Passover. 

It is impossible to assume that the ' hereditary 
custom' of the Therapeuts, of ' the first' who had 
found, according to Philo, the deeper sense or gnosis 
of the Passover-rite and its Messianic fulfilment, did 
not date from pre-Christian times. They looked for- 
ward, long before the crucifixion of Jesus, to whom 
Philo does not refer, to the fulfilment of what was dimly 
indicated by the slaying of the paschal lamb on the 
14thNisan; and they must have expected that fulfil- 
ment on the 16th Nisan, on the third day, according to 
their figurative interpretation of the Scriptures. On 
that day, we are informed by the three first Gospels, 
the twelve Apostles were surprised by what they con- 
sidered ' idle tales ' of women, by their reports about 
the visible resurrection of Jesus from the grave. We 
are told of these women, that they watched at the grave 
of Jesus, instead of following the Jews to the temple for 
the solemn offering of the first fruits and of the lamb 
without blemish. They must be regarded as represen- 
tatives of Essenic expectation. If on the morning of the 
third day after His death and after the slaying of the 
paschal lamb Jesus was visibly raised from the grave, 
this miracle could only be regarded as the fulfilment 
and thus the confirmation of what the Essenes expected 
about the antitype of the lamb offered to God with the 
firstlings on the third day after the slaying of the 
paschal lamb. 

Could it be asserted that Jesus died contempora- 
neously with the slaying of the paschal lamb, and that 
He rose from the grave, as Paul asserts, on the third 
day, that is, early in the morning of the lGth Nisan, 
when the paschal omer and the lamb without blemish 
were offered in the temple to God ? 


The words ' in the end of the Sabbath, as it began 
to dawn toward the first day,' or, ' very early in the 
morning of the first day of the week,' or ' when it was 
just beginning to dawn,' or, 'on the first day of the week, 
while it was yet dark,' clearly point to the very day 
and hour when the paschal omer was offered in the 
temple, in the early morn of the 16th Nisan. It is the 
exact time when, after solemn ' vigils,' the Therapeuts, 
according to the hereditary custom of their sect, began 
the great festival, the day of ' solemn assembly,' and 
when we may presume them to have expected the ful- 
filment of what was prefigured by the offering of the 
first fruits and the lamb without blemish, on the third 
day after the slaying of the paschal lamb, on the 16th 
Nisan. This day of the reported visible resurrection 
of Jesus was, only according to the fourth Gospel, the 
third day after his crucifixion, which latter is implied to 
have taken place on the 14th Nisan. 

We shall see that it is this Gospel only which sup- 
ports the Easter-rite of the Christian West in the second 
century, whilst the Easter-rite of the Eastern churches 
is based on the narrative about the crucifixion in the 
first three Gospels. It will become evident that the 
paschal dispute which was openly declared about the 
middle of the second century was founded not only on 
a difference of ritual, but on the question whether the 
law was to be literally or figuratively observed. The 
real question was whether Jesus had died on the 14th 
Nisan, contemporaneously with the slaying of the paschal 
lamb, as antitype of the same, or on the 15th Nisan, the 
day of the liberation from the Egyptian house of servi- 
tude, thus pointing to a spiritual exodus from spiritual 
bondage. It can be shown that the paschal dispute 
was indirectly connected with the doctrine of Jesus 
Christ as the Lamb of God. 

It was in the year 155 that Bishop Polycarp of 
Smyrna declared, before Pope Ani^etus, that he had 

A A 


solemnised the Passover with the Apostle John, and that, 
in accordance with this apostolic tradition, the Eastern 
churches preserved the Jewish Passover, especially 
the Jewish paschal supper, which they continued to 
solemnise in the night of the 14th Nisan, as the parting 
supper of the Lord, whilst on the following day they 
kept the day of His crucifixion. The Western churches, 
led by Borne and Alexandria, took no cognisance of the 
Jewish Passover, and opposed the apostolic rites which 
Polycarp represented by the tradition which presbyters 
had transmitted who preceded Pope Anicetus, and by 
which he was bound. 

According to this Eoman rite, the 14th and the 
15th Nisan might fall respectively as much as five and 
seven days before the memorial days of the crucifixion 
and of the resurrection, but these two events of Gospel- 
narrative could not be solemnised respectively on two 
successive clays. The Eoman Church, according to its 
presbyterial tradition, fixed the Sunday after the 14th 
Nisan as the day of the resurrection, the preceding- 
Friday as the day of the crucifixion, and thus the Satur- 
day in Easter-week vaguely corresponded to the Jewish 
great Sabbath of the paschal week, which however was 
fixed by a day of the month, by the 15th Nisan, the 
first day of unleavened bread, the week-day of Sabbatical 
rest. 1 

It is in harmony with this Eoman Easter-rite, which 
was opposed by Polycarp, the associate of John and 
other Apostles, that the day of the resurrection is de- 
scribed in all four Gospels as the day after the seventh 
day or Sabbath, and yet as the first day of the week, 
and as a Sunday, not as a week- Sabbath determined by 
the 15th Nisan. That day might have fallen on the 
seventh day or Sabbath, and the 16th Nisan might have 
fallen on the day after the real Sabbath, on the first day 

1 Levit. xxiii. 11, 15. 


of the week, according to Jewish reckoning, this being 
Sunday or the first day of the week according to the 
Christian week. But if so, the crucifixion had taken 
place on the day previous to the resurrection, according 
to the narratives in the first three Gospels. Only ac- 
cording to the fourth Gospel the first day of the week, 
or resurrection-day, is the third clay after the crucifixion. 

It is to be remarked that all Gospel accounts about 
the resurrection, but only the crucifixion account in the 
fourth Gospel, confirm the Eoman Easter-rite. It fol- 
lows, that the day of the crucifixion, the loth Nisan 
as the first three Gospels assert, was the seventh day or 
Sabbath, and cannot have been the day before the 
Sabbath as stated in all four Gospels. Only according 
to the fourth Gospel the crucifixion was on the 14th 
Nisan, thus on Friday, in harmony with the Paulinic 
Easter-rite as fixed by Eoman presbyters who had pre- 
ceded Pope Anicetus. 

By fixing, for all years to come, week days instead of 
days of the month for the solemnities in memory of 
the crucifixion and the resurrection, the Eoman Church 
obliterated the typical importance of the 14th as well as 
of the 16th Nisan. Thus the dangerous question was 
prevented from arising, whether the resurrection of 
Jesus had taken place on the day after His crucifixion, 
according to the statements of the first three Gospels, 
or on c the third day according to the Scriptures,' as 
Paul's Epistles and the fourth Gospel clearly assert or 

If about the middle of the second century the so- 
called Gospel after John had been recognised by the 
Church, whether as an Apostolic work or not, some 
mention must have been made of it during the 
paschal dispute. Polycarp must have declared such 
scripture to be not apostolic and not historical, inasmuch 
as it asserts what the Eastern churches, the Quarto- 
decimans, could not admit, but what the Eoman and the 

A A 2 


Western churches held, that Christ was crucified con- 
temporaneously with the slaying of the Jewish paschal 
lamb, and as antitype of the same, as Lamb of God. 
Again, Anicetus must have referred to this apostolic 
authority for the Western rite, and for the doctrine of 
the Lamb of God. If any reference to ' the Gospel 
after John' had then been made by either party, 
Irenaeus and Eusebius must have made the most of it in 
their accounts of this dispute. Irenaeus informs us that 
4 Anicetus yielded ' in so far to Polycarp, out of respect, 
that he permitted him to consecrate the elements in 
his presence, and that ' they separated from each other 
in peace, all the Church being at peace ; both those that 
observed and those that did not observe, maintaining 

The difference continued. It was not merely a 
question of calendar or about ' the manner of fasting,' 
whether the fast should be kept one day, two days, or 
more. In fact, Polycarp insisted, on the authority of 
the twelve Apostles, that the Jewish paschal supper 
with the paschal lamb must continue to be solemnised 
by the Church of Christ, and that this ought to be 
done, according to apostolic custom, on the day when 
Jesus ate the lamb with His disciples. In fact, Anice- 
tus insisted, on no other authority than that of some 
presbyters who had preceded him in Eome, that Jesus had 
not eaten the paschal lamb before He suffered, though 
the first three Gospels assert this, but that He was cruci- 
fied on the day when the Jewish paschal lamb was slain, 
and that Jesus was, as Paul had declared, the antitype 
and divinely ordered fulfilment of the same. The 
difference was essentially one of dogma, and pointed to 
the doctrine of Jesus Christ as the Lamb of God, of 
which doctrine the first three Gospels say nothing, 
whilst it forms the very basis of the fourth Gospel. So 
important were the issues of this dispute held to 
be about forty years later (196), that when Bishop 


Poly crates of Ephesus and the bishops of Asia Minor 
renewed the dispute, Pope Victor — vainly opposed by 
the peacemaker Irenaeus — excommunicated all who 
opposed the Western rite, which was then accepted 
by a few of the Eastern churches. 

Was the crucified Jesus, as antitype of the paschal 
lamb, the fulfilment of what the law in its literal sense 
could be held to have predicted, or had he not brought 
about such a fulfilment ? Was Jesus crucified on the 
day when the paschal lamb was slain, on the 14th 
Nisan, and did He rise from the grave the third day ac- 
cording to a figurative interpretation of the Scriptures, 
that is, as antitype of the paschal omer and lamb with- 
out blemish, offered on the 16th Nisan? Or was this 
day of the reported visible resurrection from the grave 
the second day after the crucifixion of Jesus on the 
15th Nisan, as the first three Gospels unanimously re- 
port ? It is certain that these three Gospels record what 
the twelve Apostles knew about the day of the cruci- 
fixion, whilst by the fourth Gospel the doctrine of Paul 
is conveyed, and falsely attributed to the Apostle John, 
that is, the doctrine about Jesus having died on the 
14th Nisan and having risen the third day * according 
to the Scriptures.' 

No further evidence is needed for asserting that 
the Quartodeciman paschal rite was upheld by the 
Apostle John's Church in Asia, which his associate 
Bishop Polycarp of Smyrna represented and defended 
against the Pope at Eome, who represented all the 
Western churches and Alexandria. But an important 
confirmation of this assertion is contained in the en- 
cyclical letter of the Church of Smyrna concerning the 
martyrdom of its bishop, Polycarp. Hilgenfeld has 
incontestably proved 1 that according to this generally 

1 Hilgenfeld, Der Paschastreit (I860), comp. Zeitschrift f. TV. T. 1861, 
pp. 285-318. 


authentic monument of Christian antiquity, Polycarp 
suffered martyrdom in the year 166, on Tuesday, March 
26, that day being 'the great Sabbath,' that is, the 
15th Nisan, on which day of the month Jesus had been 
crucified, according to the first three Gospels. This 
letter indirectly but clearly points out the above-named 
and other parallels with the passion of Jesus as related 
by these Gospels. The letter confirms that the Quarto- 
decimans, on the authority of John and of other 
Apostles with whom Polycarp associated, continued, 
according to the law, to regard the Passover as fixed 
by the day of the month, and that they would have 
opposed the solemnisation of Easter on fixed days of 
the week, as sanctioned by the Church at Eome and 
the Western churches generally. 

Hilgenfeld and his party are in a position trium- 
phantly to declare that ' critical historical inquiry in 
the paschal dispute has maintained victoriously, against 
all raging and stormy attacks, a firm stronghold of the 
Church, which covers the domain of a free Gospel in- 
quiry equally well as the right understanding of the 
most ancient Church history.' 

The paschal dispute, in fact, was based on that 
disagreement between the twelve Apostles on one 
side, and Paul on the other, which it was the object of 
the Acts to obliterate, but which the Epistles of Paul 
clearly establish. 1 To conclude. Jesus is not connected 
with the type of the paschal lamb in the first three 
Gospels, and this doctrine is there quite excluded, 
whilst the fourth Gospel connects it with the testimony 
of John the Baptist or Essene, and with the fact, there 
alone implied, that Jesus had not eaten the paschal lamb 
the day before His death, but had been crucified three 
days before His resurrection as antitype of the lamb, 
as the Passover of the Christians, according to Paul's 

' See Appendix. 


definition. Polycarp and Polycrates stood up for the 
paschal doctrine and rite of the twelve Apostles, the 
Popes Anicetus and Victor for that of the Apostle Paul, 
which was finally recognised by the Council of Nice. 

Eusebius wrote his Church History up to the year 
of the council, and as an introduction to the same. He 
died fifteen years after it, in 340. The paschal dispute 
was his great difficulty. Even the writings of the 
peacemaker Irenaeus, though intended to show that 
it was merely a ritual dispute, dimly showed the deeper 
grounds of dissension. The Arian dispute which had 
arisen in the time of Irenasus, and which the Council of 
Nice settled contemporaneously with the paschal dis- 
pute, centred in the doctrine of the divinity of Christ 
and in the doctrine of three Divine Persons in Unity. 
If Christ was not the pre-existing Angel-Messiah and 
Lamb of God from the beginning, the doctrine of the 
Trinity could not be established. But if these new 
doctrines could be applied to Jesus, the doctrine of the 
Trinity could not be evaded, and must be acknowledged. 

Paul had clearly taught or implied that Jesus Christ 
was the incarnate Angel of God, ' the spiritual rock' 
which followed the Israelites, ' the Man from heaven,' 
and the Creator of the World, ' by ' whom all things 
were made, who had come in the ' likeness ' of sinful 
flesh, and who was crucified as antitype of the paschal 
lamb, as Lamb of God. Paul was not directly referred 
to during the paschal dispute, and yet the tradition of 
some presbyters who had preceded Pope Anicetus was 
the Paulinic tradition, whether or not also that of the 
Essenes. Nor did either party refer to the fourth 
Gospel, which supports the Paulinic doctrine and the 
Roman Easter-rite. 

Eusebius pleaded the cause of Arius at the Council 
of Nice, although four years earlier this Alexandrian 
presbyter had been excommunicated by his bishop, on 
the ground that according to his doctrine Christ could 


not be the true God, but only a divine being, whether 
angelic or human. It is perhaps doubtful whether 
Anus regarded Christ as an anointed angel, or as an 
anointed man. But it is certain that Eusebius regarded 
Jesus as the incarnate Angel of God, ' the Word of 
God, God of God, Light of light, Life of life, the only 
begotten Son, born before all creation, begotten of God 
the Father before all ages, by whom also all things 
were made ; who on account of our salvation became 
incarnate, and lived among men; and who having 
suffered and risen again on the third day, ascended to 
the Father, and shall come again in glory to judge the 
living and the dead.' 

To the form of the creed as drawn up by Eusebius 
various additions were made, especially the expressions 
' of the substance of the Father,' and ' consubstantial with 
the Father,' and the doctrine of Arius was expressly 
anathematised : ' But those who say that there was a 
time when he was not, or that he did not exist before 
he was begotten, or that he was made of nothing, or 
assert that he is of other substance or essence than the 
Father, or that the Son of God is created, or mutable, 
or susceptible of change, the catholic and apostolic 
Church of God anathematises.' 

Having first objected to these additions, Eusebius 
afterwards gave his assent to the Nicene Creed as 
acknowledged by the council, but he explained the 
additions in the sense of his previous assertions, by 
saying that ' the condemnation of the assertion that 
before He was begotten He had no existence, does not 
involve any incongruity, because all (after the death of 
Arius) assent to the fact that He was the Son of God 
before He was begotten, according to the flesh.' l 

Eusebius, in thus yielding, in form at least, ' having 
regard to peace, as dreading lest we should lose a right 
understanding of the matter,' did more than Polycarp 

1 Socrates, H. E. i. 8; Tkeodoret, H. E. i. 11, 12. 


had done when he confronted Anicetus during the 
paschal dispute, which was connected with what became 
the Arian dispute. Both disputes were now closed, and 
his Church History up to this first general council had 
to be written with an eye to the compromise then 
in fact recognised by the Council of Mce. The Church 
historian undertook to prove that its decrees were in 
harmony with the one tradition which the twelve Apostles 
as well as Paul had transmitted. Yet Eusebius cannot 
bring forward a single fact or argument in favour of 
his attempt to establish the non-apostolic origin of the 
tradition represented at the beginning of the paschal 
dispute by Polycarp, the associate of the Apostles. 
He does not say who were, in his opinion, the ' simple 
and inexperienced' authors of the apostolic practice 
opposed by the presbyters of Eome, who * did not 
observe, neither did they permit those after them to 
observe it.' Already Irenagus could write to Pope 
Victor that his predecessors did not cast off any one 
4 merely for the sake of the form.' Like Irenseus, 
Eusebius is bent upon denying the existence of dogmatic 
differences in his time, and above all they both are 
careful not to admit, and they even try to render im- 
possible, the assumption that dogmatic differences can 
have existed between the twelve Apostles and Paul. 
Eusebius unhesitatingly declares that ' the very differ- 
ence in our fasting establishes the unanimity of our 

Eusebius had serious reasons for supporting the apos- 
tolic origin of the fourth Gospel by earlier testimony than 
that of Irenaeus. He had to show, if he could, to what 
testimony, in favour of the composition of that Gospel 
by the Apostle John Anicetus might have referred ; how 
the Pope could have convinced Polycarp of his error in 
promulgating ' a remoter tradition ' than that of the 
Western churches, but which had originated in ' sim- 
plicity and inexperience,' and could not have been 


apostolic, as Polycarp asserted. For this purpose 
Eusebius must have cited, in the first place, Papias, 
bishop of Hierapolis, whom Irengeus had designated as 
a direct disciple of the Apostle John. 1 Eusebius can 
only show that Papias, who knew the first Epistle 
of John, referred but to two Gospels, of Mark and 
Matthew. Eusebius cannot show that Papias referred 
— any more than Polycarp — to Paul personally, or to 
the third and fourth Gospels. Yet Polycarp in his 
epistle (ch. iv.) cites and explains a passage from the 
first Epistle of John (iv. 3) the Apostle and his as- 

In the second place, Eusebius had to utilize for his 
purpose the writings of Hegesippus. He gives extracts 
from this Jewish-Christian's 'Memorials of Apostolic 
Doctrine.' He was a born Jew, whose lifetime almost 
covers the second century, and of whom he writes that 
in his Memorials 'he left a most complete record of 
his own views.' 2 Having considered the unhistorical 
nature of Eusebius's declaration, that the practices of 
the Therapeuts, described by Philo and sanctioned by 
Eome, were those which ' the first heralds of the 
Gospel ' had ' handed down from the Apostles,' we are 
bound to accept with great caution what he says 
about the private if not peculiar views of Hegesippus. 

Eeferring to ' the ancient heresies prevalent among 
the Jews,' Hegesippus stated that ' there were also 
different opinions ' in Israel ' against the tribe of Judah 
and the Messiah.' He distinguishes the Messianic 
opinions of the Essenes from those of the Sadducees 
and Pharisees. According to Hegesippus, Christianity 
had evolved from Judaism, but not by a figurative 
interpretation of the Scriptures. For not a word is 
attributed to Hegesippus which could be explained as 
sanctioning the Essenic mode of interpretation, their 

' Iren. Haer. v. 33, 4 f. ; but compare Eus. H. E. iii. 39, 1 f. 
- Hist. Bed. iv. 22; comp. 8; ii. 23 ; iii. 11. 


rites or doctrines. What he says about James, the 
brother of the Lord, proves that Hegesippus must have 
regarded Jesus as the anointed man announced by ' the 
law and the prophets,' not as the anointed angel. 

If it can be established that Paul has applied to 
Jesus, as Stephen had done before him, this new 
Messianic conception, although Jesus had opposed it, 
then it will follow that the difference between the 
twelve Apostles and Paul was based on nothing less 
than on ' different opinions ' about Christ. 

After the loss (destruction ?) of the work of Hege- 
sippus it cannot be proved, but it is almost certain, 
that it contained direct attacks against Paul. For one 
such passage has been -cited by Stephanos Gobaros, 
of the sixth century, who had put together the di- 
verging and contradicting sayings of the Fathers on dog- 
matic questions. Hegesippus referred to Paul's having 
written that God had revealed to him through His 
spirit what eye had not seen, nor ear heard, and 
which had not entered the heart of man. Yet Jesus 
had said to the twelve Apostles: 'Blessed are your 
eyes for they see, and your ears for they hear.' Hege- 
sippus had added that Paul, by such 'vain' saying, 
had placed himself in ' lying contradiction ' to Matthew. 1 
It is not likely that this was the only passage which 
Eusebius found it convenient not to cite in his Church 
History, calculated to show that the doctrinal unity of 
the present had always existed in the past. 

We saw that Eusebius connects the Eoman Easter- 
rite directly with Essenic practices, as recognised by 
the Apostles. Moreover, he actually declares it to be 
' highly probable ' that the Scriptures peculiar to the 
order of the Therapeuts, which they had received from 
the founders of their sects, were made use of in the 
composition of our Gospels and of the Pauline Epistles, 

1 l'hotius Cod. 232. 


especially that to the Hebrews. 1 So determined was 
the Church historian to use every conceivable argument 
in his attempt to connect the indubitable and acknow- 
ledged Essenic Easter-rite of the Eoman Church with 
the twelve Apostles as well as with Paul ! Can it be true 
that the rite in question was indeed transmitted by the 
twelve Apostles, although Polycarp declared the con- 
trary? If Peter founded the Eoman Church, the 
Jewish-Christian origin of which is undisputed, can he 
and can John be regarded as having been originally 
Essenes, or as having become the promulgators of 
Essenic doctrines ? If not, are we at liberty to suppose 
that anti-Jewish influence in Eome decided the Easter- 
rite in that Church sooner or later after the death of 
Peter, in accordance with Paulinic and Essenic (Gnostic ?) 
tradition ? 

According to Hegesippus it was after the reign of 
Trajan (98-117), after the death of the Apostles and of 
the direct hearers of Jesus, that ' false teachers,' who up 
to this time had been or may have been ' skulking in 
dark retreats,' as Hegesippus admits, openly came for- 
ward with ' combinations of impious error by fraud and 
delusions,' preaching against ' the gospel of truth.' 
Before the open and combined attack of these false 
Gnostics, the peace in the virgin-Church had not been 
disturbed. It seems that already before this time, ac- 
cording to a statement of Polycarp, recorded by Irenaeus, 
the Apostle John had stood up against Cerinthus, and 
designated him as ' the enemy of truth.' But Hegesippus 
does not refer to Cerinthus as a disturber of the peace, 
perhaps because Cerinthus, whether he wrote the anti- 
Paulinic Apocalypse or not, like the Jewish-Christian 
historian, did not recognise the Apostle Paul. 

Nor does Hegesippus seem to have connected with 
the open gnostic conspiracy in the time of Trajan either 
Simon Magus nor his ' successor ' Menander, with whom 

1 Hist. Eccl. ii. 17. 


Eusebius connects Basilides and Saturninus, as well as 
Cerdon, who preceded Marcion. But already in the year 
of Trajan's accession (97-98) Barnabas, by his Epistle, had 
crossed the border, the non-overstepping of which had 
until then kept the peace in the Church. Not only because 
of Paul's admission of the Gentiles, Barnabas separated 
from him. It is probable that Hegesippus regarded the 
anti-Jewish teaching of Barnabas as the beginning of 
the open attacks on the true Church. For Barnabas 
represented Essenic-Gnostic doctrines, and opposed by 
his advanced Paulinism the compromise which Paul tried 
to accomplish with Judaism. It was not necessary for 
Hegesippus to consider the moderate and tolerating 
Judaism expressed in the so-called first Epistle of 
Clement, whether composed already in 68 or from 93 
to 96 or in 120. But the false Gnostics with their 
ultra-Paulinism followed the advanced Paulinism of the 
Epistle of Barnabas, and they left in its isolation the 
Epistle of Clement which first sets up the authority of 
'Peter and Paul.' The compromise which the Gnostics 
intended to bring about was to lead to far greater con- 
cessions from the Jewish-Christian party. They did not 
forget that shortly before his death Paul had been de- 
signated as the chief of a sect everywhere spoken 
against, therefore as a false teacher. 

According to Epiphanius it was shortly before the 
paschal dispute that the leading Gnostics, among them 
Marcion, the great anti-Judaist, went to Eome and 
asked the Eoman presbyters, whose predecessors had 
declared Paul to belong to a sect everywhere spoken 
again>t, whether the old bottles would do for the new 
wine. Did the Gnostics point to a revision and amplifi- 
cation of the Gospels? Did they point to the necessity of 
a new Gospel in which the law of Moses would be openly 
asserted to be only the law of the Jews, as is done in 
the fourth Gospel? Did these Gnostics, whose con- 
nection with the Essenes and with some of Paul's 


doctrines we have pointed out — did they plead before 
the Eoman elders the necessity of asserting in the new 
law of a new Gospel that the Jews always misunder- 
stood the words of Jesus by not interpreting them 
figuratively, according to Essenic-Gnostic fashion ? Was 
the new Gospel to assert that John the Baptist or 
Essene had pointed to Jesus as the Lamb of God, that 
His crucifixion had taken place contemporaneously with 
the slaying of the paschal lamb, and His resurrection 
on the third day, according to Paulinic and Essenic 
tradition? If so, the an ti- Jewish fourth Gospel must 
have become recognised by the churches after the com- 
mencement of the paschal dispute, sooner or later after 
the year 155, and the Essenic character of ' the Gospel 
after John' as well as of the Pauline Epistles would 
become probable. Then the otherwise unaccountable 
statement of Eusebius about the insertion of Essenic 
tradition in all four Gospels as well as in Pauline Epistles 
would be confirmed by the fourth Gospel, which is so 
directly connected with Paul's Epistles. 

It must here suffice to state that only according 
to the fourth Gospel Peter's brother, Andrew, and an- 
other disciple, whom tradition identifies with John, 
were disciples of the Baptist, the 'Ashai or Essai, the 
Essene, when Jesus called them. Thus it is darkly 
intimated that the Essenic tradition about Jesus having 
been crucified as antitype of the paschal lamb, in 
accordance with the Baptist's testimony and with the 
Gospel ' after John,' had received the sanction of this 
Apostle. If so, Andrew's brother, the Apostle Peter, 
could have sanctioned no other than the Essenic tradi- 
tion, which he must have transmitted to the presbyters 
of the Roman Church, as Eusebius clearly indicates 
that he did. But the accounts of the Passover in the 
first three Gospels prove that the twelve Apostles 
cannot possibly have believed Jesus to have been 
crucified on the day when the Jewish paschal lamb 


was slain. The twelve must have protested against 
such a statement, and also against the doctrine of the 
Lamb of God which was based upon it, if in their 
time such a statement had been made in any Scripture 
purporting to represent their knowledge about the 
views of Jesus on the Passover. 

By its Easter-rite, which the fourth Gospel alone 
supports, and which triumphed finally at the Council 
of Nice, the Eoman Church has certainly not fol- 
lowed the tradition of the Apostle John, but it has 
represented Essenic and Paulinic tradition. Yet at the 
end of the so-called Gospel after John it is asserted that 
the disciple whom Jesus loved has written this Gospel. 
The unusual attestation is made by several persons, 
who declare : ' We know that his witness is true.' 
These persons can only have been the elders of a 
Church where the Eoman Easter -rite prevailed in the 
second century. They cannot have been represen- 
tatives of the Churches of Smyrna and of Ephesus, 
since the bishops of these Churches opposed at Rome 
the Easter-rite there prevailing, and Polycarp had done 
this as associate of the Apostle John, with whom he 
had celebrated the Passover. Nor can those who testify 
that the Apostle John has composed the fourth Gospel 
have been the elders of any of the Eastern Churches, 
who were all represented by Polycarp. It is not 
to be doubted that this Apostle ministered in Asia 
Minor, and it is probable that he was buried at 

Those who attested the apostolic composition of 
the fourth Gospel, attributing it to the Apostle John, 
although Polycarp had claimed, without contradiction, 
the authority of that Apostle, his associate, for the rite 
which the Eoman Church opposed, may with sufficient 
reason be regarded as the leading elders of the Church 
at Eome. That Church must be held responsible for 
the setting up and the recognition of the fourth Gospel 


as ' the Gospel after John.' It is the Eoman Church 
which originated the discrepancies in the first three 
Gospels, which exclude by their narratives of the cruci- 
fixion the resurrection on ' the third day according 
to the Scriptures,' whilst in these Gospels have yet 
been inserted narratives of the resurrection as having 
taken place on the third day after the crucifixion. 
The second day is the only possible day according to 
the first three Gospels for the event recorded at the 
end of them, in appendixes of more than doubtful 
historical credibility. 

Among the Gnostics who were in Eome before a.d. 
132, and who probably continued there till about twenty 
years later, must first be mentioned Basilides. He had 
already recognised Paul, whom Cerinthus had opposed ; 
after him a gospel was called ' the gospel according to 
Basilides,' mentioned by Origen and Jerome, and his 
commentary, of which extracts are preserved, shows 
that this gcspel was akin to that ' according to Luke.' 
Basilides, who died soon after a.d. 132, according to 
Jerome, is by Hippolytus, about the year a.d. 225, 
shown by extracts to have frequently used our can- 
onical fourth Gospel. 1 Valentinus came to Eome about 
136 to 140, a few years after the death of Basilides, and 
remained there beyond 155, when the famous debates 
took place between Polycarp and Pope Anicetus. It is 
non-proven whether he knew the fourth Gospel of our 
Canon, but this is more than probable if Basilides used 
it, and since disciples of Valentinus before 170 have cer- 
tainly cited passages we find only there. Valentinus was 
4 a hearer of Theudas ' who ' was the pupil of Paul,' 
according to Clement of Alexandria. The latter states 
that this Apostle designates as ' the fulness of the bles- 
sings of Christ ' which he would bring to the Eomans, 
'- the gnostic communication ' or tradition about the 

1 Hilgenfeld and Lipsius, Einleitung in das N. T. 46, 47, consider it pos- 
sible that these extracts refer to a later Gnosticism. 


mysteries till then hidden (to the Komans), and which 
the learned father explains were revealed by the Son of 
God, 'the Teacher who trains the Gnostic by mysteries.' 1 
Paul was fully recognised as an Apostle by Valentinus, 
and since 140 byMarcion as the only Apostle. Assert- 
ing that ' Paul alone knew the truth,' Marcion altered 
Luke's Gospel into the gospel which he alone recognised. 
Had the Fourth Gospel of our Canon, or one similar to 
it, been then recognised by the Churches, it would have 
been easier for the Paulinic gnostic, after some altera- 
tions, to recognise the same, although not as composed 
by the Apostle John. 

Since the Gospel after John, or a document containing 
similar passages to those we find in that gospel only, 
was known, at least to Gnostics, perhaps already more 
than 23 years before the arrival of Poly carp at Eome, 
the more remarkable it is that Pope Anicetus did not 
refer to that gospel, as to a document in favour of the 
Western Easter-rite, with which the Gnostics must have 
sympathised. If it could be asserted that this gospel 
was composed by the Apostle John, it would have con- 
tradicted what Polycarp, his associate, had said about 
this Apostle's recognition of the Jewish and Christian 
Passover-rite in the Eastern Churches, and the Paschal 
dispute would have been over at once. 

It can be now asserted, without fear of impartial 
contradiction, that all the passages which refer to or 
are connected with the announced resurrection of Jesus 
on ' the third day,' were certainly added in the first 
three Gospels, and this not before the recognition of the 
Fourth Gospel, or possibly with a view to its reception in 
the Canon. How many more corrections, omissions, or 
additions seem then to have been effected in the Gos- 
pels and the Acts of the Apostles, we have not here to 
enquire. Suffice it to say, that in the first Gospel of 
our Canon the aboriginal genealogy of Jesus, showing 

1 Strom, vii. 17; v. 10; vii. 2; Rom. xv. 29. 
B B 


his human descent, has been undermined ; that his mis- 
sion as Son of David has been enlarged ; many references 
to the Old Testament have been cited from the 
(Essenic ?) Septuagint ; the testimony of the (Essenic) 
Baptist was somewhat harmonised with its record in the 
Fourth Gospel, diametrically opposed to ' the Gospel ac- 
cording to the Hebrews,' which latter is the groundwork 
of that according to Matthew. This Gospel was recast, 
in part immediately after the destruction of Jerusalem, 
partly about the middle of the second century, by a 
Eoman Catholic reviser. 

It will continue to be a debatable question, to what 
extent the first three Gospels, as transmitted to us, were 
composed with an eye to the Fourth Gospel, and to what 
extent the latter was finally revised with a view of har- 
monising it, as far as possible, with the earlier propa- 
gated Gospels and with Pauline Epistles. But it can be 
rendered probable that, by the pressure of the increas- 
ingly mighty party of Gnostics, about the middle of the 
second century, the Eoman Church, till then chiefly the 
representative of Jewish-Christian principles, of those 
of the twelve Apostles, ivas offered a compromise based 
on the full recognition of Paul. This compromise, 
which is imperatively demanded by an unprejudiced 
comparison of the Scriptures forming the New Testa- 
ment, had become a necessity for the Eoman Church, 
which could not have brought about the peace in the 
Churches, on the basis of uniformity, without having 
first brought about and sanctioned the collection of 
New Testament Scriptures, in the very form in which 
they have been transmitted to us. 

The connection of Paul and of the Gnostics with the 
Essenes being thou known, at least to the 'stewards of 
the mysteries of God,' it became necessary, by Paul's 
lardy but full recognition of the humanity of Jesus in 
the Epistle to the Romans — assuming that isolated pas- 
sage not to be a later interpolation— to separate him 


from the Gnostics who denied the natural birth of Jesus, 
the first of whom was Simon of Samaria. The Church 
having recognised as Apostolic the fourth Paulinic, 
gnostic, and anti-judaic gospel, Marcion's distinction 
between the God of the Christians and the God of the 
Jews had to be authoritatively denied. Jesus is there- 
fore here reported to have said, that his God was the 
God of the Jews, what neither He nor Paul certainly 
ever could have denied. To yield in such and similar 
points was made easy for Marcion and his adherents by 
the recognition of the new Christian Gospel as a new 
law, contrasted to the law of Moses, which did not bring 
' grace and truth.' 

The Fourth Gospel promulgates the Paulinic and 
Essenic doctrine of Christ as the Angel of God and the 
world's creator. By the omission of the genealogies and 
by other passages it draws in question the humanity of 
Jesus, which the Docetics denied ; it confirms the new 
and Essenic doctrine of Christ as the Lamb of God, and 
thus the Roman Easter-rite, based on the new assertion 
that Jesus had been crucified on the 14th Nisan, con- 
temporaneously with the slaying of the paschal lamb, 
Finally, it qualifies, if it does not oppose, the promise 
of the keys to Peter, by the promise of another advocate 
of the Divine Spirit, which promise some of the Paulinic, 
Essenic, and Gnostic parties may well have regarded as 
fulfilled by Paul. For in the letters addressed to the 
brethren in Asia and Phrygia by the Christians in Gaul, 
which Irenseus may have brought to Rome soon after 
A.D. 170, it is stated of one of their martyrs, Vettius 
Epagathus, that ' he had the Paraclete within him, 
namely the Spirit more abundant than Zacharias,' prob- 
ably the Father of John the Baptist or Essene. No 
reference is made to the recorded Pentecostal outpour- 
ing of the Spirit. Origen argues that the Paraclete 
brought the Gnosis, which the Twelve did not know. 1 

1 Eus. ILE. V. 1 ; Grig, c. Cels. II. 2 ; de Frinc. I. 3. 

13 B 2 


Although against all Gnostic doctrines a protest was 
made about 180 by the so-called Muratorian list of 
Scriptures which the Eoman Church recognised, yet a 
compromise, based on the introduction of the anti- 
Jewish Easter-rite by Pope Sixtus I. (about 115-125), 
seems to have been offered by the Gnostic party. 
Although the succeeding Popes Hyginus and Pius I. 
checked the fervour of the Gnostics, it was probably by 
such a compromise that Anicetus declared himself to be 
bound. Having accepted it on her own conditions, the 
Eoman Church became the declared enemy of the abori- 
ginal non-Essenic Jewish-Christianity, represented by the 
twelve Apostles, and which Paul had only in part opposed. 

Paul was martyred during the Neronic persecution, 
in the city in which, till after the middle of the second 
century, Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians at- 
tended different places of worship, according to Justin 
Martyr ; * in the city from which Paul could write to 
the Philippians that some there preached Christ ' even 
for envy and strife,' and ' out of love of dispute and not 
in purity ' ; in the city from whence ' brethren ' went to 
meet Paul ' as far as Appii forum,' and where yet he 
was connected with a ' sect ' which was ' everywhere 
spoken against.' This was done by ' the chief of the 
Jews,' including the presbyters of the Christian Church, 
whom Paul called ' brethren ' at Eome as he called 
Apostles at Antioch ' Jews.' 

Paul suffered martyrdom in Eome at a time when 
the Eoman law regarded the Jewish (and Jewish 
Christian) religion as a lawful one, but where already 
about the time of Paul's conversion the State had 
to interfere because of riots occasioned by a Chres- 
tus-party, which, according to Clement of Alexandria, 
may be termed a Christos-party. The name Christians, 
by which ' the disciples ' were first called at Antioch, 
was given to those who had been called Jessaioi or 

1 Dial. 47 y Mangold, Der R-bmerbrief. 


Essaioi, that is, to the Essenes and Therapeuts, who were 
distinguished from the Nazoraioi, as the first disciples 
of Jesus were called, according to Epiphanius. 1 The 
separation of Jews and Jewish Christians at Eome from 
Paulinic (Essenic) or Gentile Christians is proved directly 
by the Acts, and by Justin Martyr, indirectly by Paul's 
Epistle. It becomes thus explainable why the harmo- 
nising Acts do not refer to the martyrdom of Paul, 
which seems to have taken place under circumstances 
which had to be mystified in order to strengthen the 
bonds of peace in the Churches. 

Jews had settled in Eome more than a century before 
Paul's martyrdom, as the Hebrew cemetery proves. 
Among them seem to have been Essenes or Therapeuts, 
since Aquila of Pontus, possibly the Onkelos of Pontus 
after whom the Targum is called, had left Eome about 
the time of the edict banishing Jews, it may be in con- 
sequence of the Chrestus-dispute among them. These 
Jewish disputants, the Christians, earlier called Essaioi, 
were probably Essenes, and Aquila and Priscilla were 
almost certainly Therapeuts, since these taught Apollos 
4 the more perfect doctrine,' the gnosis of Essenic origin, 
whilst only Therapeuts had women among their Initiated. 
Paul had promised to the Eomans to bring them some 
' spiritual gift,' that is, the gnosis, according to Clement 
of Alexandria. The ' chiefs of the Jews ' in Eome, called 
this gnosis the doctrine of ' a sect everywhere spoken 
against.' The non-orthodox Jews or Essenes, first called 
Christians in the centre of Simon Magus's activity, at 
Antioch, where Paul called Peter and Barnabas dissem- 
bling ' Jews,' had different opinions about Jesus the 
Messiah, considering him the incarnate Angel of God, as 
the extracts from Elkesai's book prove. During the 
reign of Nero (5 4-68) they seem to have all expected, 
like Paul, Christ's return at that time. By their figura- 
tive interpretation of Scripture, they had been taught 

1 liter, xxix. 


that Christ's return would be accompanied by great 
events, ending with the fall of * Babylon ' or Imperial 
Borne, to be destroyed ' by fire.' 

Between four and five years after the burning of 
Borne the ' revelation ' of this Essenic expectation was 
published, which had been known to the Initiated only. 
It refers to the martyrs slain by Nero, to ' the souls of 
them that have been slain for the Word of God, and for 
the testimony which they bore.' To that testimony 
belonged the prophecy of the burning of Borne, the ful- 
filment of which the Essenes in the year 64 must have 
believed to have come. The accusation that these 
Essenic Socialists, the ' Christians,' had caused this great 
conflagration is non-proven. Yet Tacitus writes i 
' Those (" Christians ") who confessed (to have set fire 
to the city), later by their information a vast multitude 
were convicted, not so much for the crime of incendiar- 
ism as for (their) hatred of the human race.' 1 This 
hatred had found its expression in the symbolical 
account of contemporaneous events as recorded in the 
Apocalypse, when Tacitus (born 57, consul 97) received 
favours from Vespasian. Before the Apocalypse was 
published, between June 68 and January 69, it may 
have been known that there were men within the city 
who in their conventicles whispered into each other's 
ears : Borne must be effaced, ' delenda est Borna ' ! 

It is the Roman Church which has inculcated on 
the Christian conscience many recorded facts which are 
non-proven if historical. Thus Christians were led to 
believe that the twelve Apostles, who had not expected 
any miracle at the grave, and who considered the stories 
of the women as ' idle tales,' became convinced of the 
visible resurrection of Jesus on 'the third day according 
to the Scriptures.' Thus the Church was led to believe 
that it was the sudden conversion of the Apostles from 
unbelief which overcame their dismay and dejection, 

1 Tacitus, Ann, xv. 44: Suet. Nero, 16. 


caused by the crucifixion of their Master, whom they 
had all forsaken, from whom they had fled, because of 
this apparent frustration of their hopes. To bring 
about this conversion, which we are told commenced 
at the grave to which women had called the Apostles, 
it was necessary that Jesus Christ should appear to 
them in the same bodily shape in which He had been 
nailed to the cross, not as a spirit, but in the flesh and 
with bones which could be and were handled. Thus 
resuscitated in the human form, though surrounded 
with an indescribable glory, it is written that Jesus 
commanded the Apostles to baptize in the name of the 
Trinity, a doctrine not known to the Old Testament, 
nor confirmed by those sayings of Jesus which are re- 
corded in the first three Gospels. To these unbelieving 
Apostles, after their sudden conversion, which prece- 
ded the recorded Pentecostal miracle, the command 
and authority was given to retain or remit sins, that is, 
to ' pardon transgressions,' like the Angel of the Lord. 
They saw the risen Lord ascend to the skies, whether 
on the third or on the fortieth day, and heard the two 
men in white apparel promise that the same Jesus 
which was taken up from them into heaven ' shall 
come' as they had beheld Him go into heaven, that 
is, witli flesh and blood. Yet Paul had said that 
' flesh and blood cannot inherit ' the kingdom of God, 
which Christ had entered in this form, as we are told. 

The Epistles of Paul prove that, like himself, the 
twelve Apostles were by apparitions of the Crucified 
convinced of their Master's life after death, but they do 
not even imply that the disciples whom Jesus had 
chosen preached His resurrection on ' the third day 
according to the Scriptures,' that is, as antitype of the 
paschal lamb and of the paschal omer. Yet the Twelve 
gave Paul and Barnabas the hand of fellowship, and 
recognised them as Apostles among the Gentiles. 
Though there were essential differences between the 


doctrines of the Apostles of circumcision and those 
of the Apostles of uncircumcision, Paul writes that the 
same God was effectual in both. 

6 The holy Catholic Church ' had to represent not 
only the tradition of Peter but also the tradition of 
Paul. It is possible that these traditions had been 
respectively represented in Eome by the contempor- 
aneous successors of Peter and of Paul, by Cletus and 
Linus. The latter, surviving Cletus, or more probably 
Clement, was the first Roman bishop of the united 
Petrinic and Paulinic Churches, whose pontificate lasted 
till 86. A great compromise had to be made, not only 
with regard to doctrine, but with regard to history. 
Without the establishment of peace in the ancient 
Church, much less of the truth would have been trans- 
mitted by written records, the relative value and the 
interpretation of which could not have been and was 
not confided to the people. Mysteries there had always 
been in every established Church, and mysteries formed 
necessarily the rock of the Catholic Church. We regard 
nothing as more historical, though mysterious, than what 
is conveyed by the words : ' Thou art Peter, and upon 
this rock will I build my Church, and the gates of hell 
shall not prevail against it.' 

We cannot here examine the genuineness or the 
meaning of these words, nor shall we attempt to eluci- 
date the question whether the Apostle Peter, person- 
ally at Rome or not, can have transmitted to the elders 
of the Roman Church ' the mysteries of the kingdom of 
heaven.' Jesus is recorded to have entrusted such 
mysteries to the safe keeping of the Apostles, probably 
in the fullest measure to those three to whom Paul 
refers as pillars of the Church, in which passage James 
is mentioned before Peter. The primacy of the Roman 
Church, which was sooner or later an historical fact, 
may therefore have been originally derived, not from 
the political pre-eminence of Rome as the city of the 


world, but it may really have been an institution 
founded by Jesus Christ for the purpose of transmitting 
from generation to generation a holy trust. If so, the 
stewards of these mysteries, whom Jesus did not appoint 
as bishops, have received the command of Jesus Christ, as 
recorded in the Gospels, at some future time to preach 
openly, from the housetops, the mysteries confided to 
them, to reveal to the nations ' the key of knowledge,' 
once ' taken away ' by the spiritual leaders of Israel. If 
Jesus has promised to the twelve Apostles that He 
would in an especial sense be with them ' all the days, 
even unto the end of the world,' the light from heaven 
will reveal to their successors the proper time for 
carrying out that command. Till then holy tradition, 
' the memory of the Church,' partly ascertained by 
free critical inquiry, must be recognised as the source 
of Holy Scripture, as the key to the lock. There was 
a Church before the Bible. 

Before Paul's martyrdom, he and the twelve Apostles 
had already initiated and acted upon a compromise 
which led to their harmonious co-operation. Based 
upon this compromise, which Paul's Epistle to the Gala- 
tians acknowledges, a more far-reaching compromise 
became necessary, about the middle of the second cen- 
tury, in consequence of the paschal dispute and the 
increasing power of the Gnostics. To the Eoman 
Church belongs the high honour to have brought about 
a final, compromise, accepting it with all its conditions 
and consequences, including the enlargement and revi- 
sion of the New Testament. It is a sad but incontro- 
vertible fact, that only thus, on the supposed necessity of 
doctrinal uniformity, the peace in the Churches became 
possible. By acting in the spirit of Peter and Paul, the 
peace in the Churches will in future be established and 
maintained. 1 

1 We purpose to show this in a work entitled ' The Peace in the 


When the seed of the Word of God shall have 
sufficiently prepared the hearts of mankind, then the 
Holy Ghost, through the instrumentality of different 
tongues and forms, will assemble the nations of the 
whole world, in the unity, not in the uniformity, of the 
faith, and Christ shall be ' all in all.' 



Notes on Farrar* 8 ' Life and Work of St. Paid. 9 

1. Dogmatical difficulty. — Canon Farrar regards the Acts as ' in all its 

main outlines a genuine and trustworthy history,' and ' in complete accord- 
ance ' with Paul's Epistles 'as regards the main facts.' Paul's statement 
about ' the false brethren secretly introduced/ which certainly refers to main 
facts, is not mentioned in the Acts. Paul implies that these false brethren 
were those who ' came from James.' Farrar explains that they ' represented 
themselves as emissaries of James,' probably exaggerating the statement they 
were authorised to make, if indeed they had ' any express commission,' and 
did not ' assume ' the authority of James. But this is evidently one of those 
intended omissions in the Acts, so admirably calculated ' to check the strife 
of parties by showing that there had been no irreconcilable opposition be- 
tween the views and ordinances of St. Peter and St. Paul.' The former 
was called a hypocrite by the latter, for having accepted the correction of 
James, and for having, with Barnabas and < the other Jews,' separated from 
Paul. Again, the Canon tells us, ' without hesitation,' that Gal. ii. is Paul's 
account of the Apostolic Council narrated in Acts xv., that his Second 
journey was in fact the Third. No doubt, dogmatical difficulties would 
arise from the admission of two, for a time, hostile parties in the primitive 
Church, of ' opposition of the leaders, of personal antipathy of St. Paul and 
the Twelve ' (Farrar, 1. c. I. 300 f, 7, 8, 405 n, 3, 410 f, 440, 447 ; eoinp. 
Jowett, Romans, etc., I. 326 ; Bishop Lightfoot on St. Paul and the Three ; 
Gal. 276-346). 

St. Paul himself asserts that ' faith ' came to Israel from without, not 
from the Twelve, but by the engrafting of the wild olive branch on the 
native olive tree, that is, of the Ethiopian or African olive (Oleaster) on the 
Palestinian olive. Pliny and others state that this was done to strengthen 
the native olive (//. X. xviii. 18 ; Colum. de re Rust. v. 9; Palladium, etc., 
see Farrar, 1. c. I. 21, 1). 

2. Chronological difficulty.— Referring to the period of the Judges as given 
by St. Paul, Farrar admits (I. 370, 2) that the 450 years result from the 
addition of the respective Scriptural dates, which he calls 'vague and often 
synchronous,' and that this period is confirmed by Josephus. Yet he clings 
to the 480 years of the First Book of Kings, and asserts thai by accepting 
Paul's period of 450 years ' we only create chronological difficulties.' But 
the 14th ofHezeMah ought to be the year B.C. 711 according to Assyrian 
inscriptions ; and it is so, if the period of 450 years is accepted, together with 
the traditional year B.C. 2300 for the Flood. All the required synchronisms, 
hitherto regarded as difficulties, or rather impossibilities, can be thus estab- 
lished {The Chronology of the Bible) conip. Trans. Society of Biblical 
Archeology, VI. 100-106)'. 

18, „ 9, 
25, „ 14,^ 
151, „ 21, 


Gomgenda and Addenda. 

Page v, line 6, Bereshith Rabah I., on Dan. ii. 22. 
„ 9, ., 12, for though, read through. 

for Tathagatha read Tathagata. Turnour, in his Introduc- 
tion to the Mahawanso, p. 56, decides that Tathagata may- 
mean < he who had come in the same manner as the other 
Buddha's.' Childers in his Pali Diet, identifies Tathagata 
with the expression ' the son of man.' The Chinese ju 
lai (Tathagata) is explained by Medhurst in his Chinese 
Diet, as « the coming ' (Buddha). For these reasons Pro- 
fessor Beal (in a letter) translates Tathagata by ' the 
coming One ' (comp. Ezek. xxi. 27 ; Is. ix. 6 ; xvi. 5 ; Jer. 
L xxiii. 5). 
2:?, „ 21, for sign read constellation. 

2S> » 6, „ variableness „ parallax. 
36, „ 13, „ unbearing, „ unbaring. 
48, note, read Koppen, Die Religion des Buddha I. 
58, line 19, for vhu read bhu. 
„ „ 20, ,, vhuvar „ bhvtvar. 
78, ,, 27, read in the 27th year about B.C. 259. 
82, „ 11, read, and enjoins reverence for one's own faith, and no 

reviling nor injury. 
104, note, for Jehovah read Elohim. 
106, line 23, read seven walls of Ecbatana. 

109, „ 22, ,, which fact Clement of Alexandria designates as non- 
109, note, read puerperal state, though she was not ; for some say, that 
after she brought forth she was found, when examined, 
to be a virgin. 
167, line 5, for redemption read liberation. 
182, „ 19, „ Rome read Caesarea. 
187, note 1, read Rom. viii. 3, 4. 
193, line 23, for mankind read the new creation. 
„ „ 26, „ all men are read i all things,' and, in a special sense, 
' we ' are. 

225, „ 28, for 11th Nisan read 13th Nisan. 

226, „ 3, „ 

252, „ 19, ,, Hebrews read Hebrew. 

253, „ 19, „ tribal read scribal. 

272, „ 10, read by the Sadducees, not by the Pharisees. 

276, „ 12, „ a later date has been supported. 

287, „ 13, „ Ctutgar. 

229, „ 20, „ 1776-75. 

300, „ 22, „ Enoch, and already then. 


Abidha, 30 

Agni, 56, 105, 130 

Alexander, 78, 82, 83 

Ananda, 47 

Ananias, 175-177 

Angel-Messiah, 12, 23, 24, 25, 104- 
137, 184-196, 221, 237, 257, 259, 
271, 279,285—299, 303, 304-325, 
331-341, 341-344, 348, 359, 363, 

Aquila, 242, 243, 373 

Aramaean, 85, 86 

Arani, 56, 105 

Arms, 359, 360 

Arsakes, 78 

Asita, 36 

Asoka, 16, 18, 79, 82 

Assidseans, 90 

Atonement, 5, 6, 153-155, 220-238, 

Bairat (Bhabra), 16 

Banus, 149, 232 

Barnabas, 185, 186, 375 

Barnabas, Epistle, 211, 222, 325-333, 

Baptism, 42, 43, 45, 115, 117, 125, 

Basilides, 341, 367 
Beulah, 42 
Bhava, 32 
Bhagavat, 20, 35 
Bodhi, Buddh, Bodb, 9, 10, 20 
Bodhisatwa, 25, 35 
Brahm, 9, 10, 31 
Brahma, 32, 37 
Brahmans, 3, 46 
Buddha (see Gautama), 10, 11, 18 f. 

Capernaum, 113 

Oasdim, 4, 5, 72, 105 

Oerinthus, 316-324, 354, 367 

Chaberim, 86 

Ohaldaeans, 4, 5, 7, 72, 86 

Cherub or Kirub, 105 

Cheta, 72 

Chrestus-party, 181, 279, 372, 373 

Christians, name of, 270, 281, 351, 

Christmas-day, 18 f. 
Clement, Pope, 374 
Clement, Epistle, 365 
Cletus, Pope, 374 
Confucius, 34 
Cross, symbol of, 57-59 

Daniel, 84, 85, 288 

Daniel, Book of, 4, 85, 93, 283-295 

Dhammapada, 16, 121 

Dionysos, 65 

Dorians, 67 

Easter-rite, 348-368 

El Shaddai, 8 

Elijah, 121, 208 

Elkesai, 103, 111-119 

Elohist, 86, 89 

Emmaus, disciples of, 206 

Enoch, Book of, 298-300 

Ephthalites, 13 

Eros and Serosh, 61 

Essenes or Essai, 77-103, 119-137, 

138-167, 168-240, 259, 261-265, 

348-352, 373-374 
Essenasnes, 90 
Essenic writings, 17, 240, 258, 282- 

333, 363 
Ezra, Apocalypse of, 325 

Gautama, 9, 10, 12, 18-52 



Gnosis, 93, 99, 177, 259, 260, 281, 

Gnostics, 212, 364, 369 

Hea, 105 

Hegesippus, 270-272, 362-305 
Hellenists, 168-183 
Herodians, 261-265 
Himalaya. 14 
Hindus, 10, 32 
Hippolytus, 367 
Homer, 70-75 
Huns, 13, 14 
Hyksos, 72 

Indians, 2, 9, 77 

Indra, 2, 34, 37, 44, 65 

lonians, 69-75 

Iranians, 2, 10 

Irenseus, 357, 359 

Isia, 22 

Isvaradeva, 19, 20, 28, 30, 64 

Iyotisham, 21 

Jainism, 12, 13, 78 
James, brother of Jesus, 261-281 
James, Epistle of, 276-281 
Jehovist, 86, 89 

Jesus Christ, 137-167; date of 
crucifixion, 173 ; resurrection, 173, 
196-213, 344-355; disciples of, 
173 f.; person of, 184-187 ; as the 
Spirit of God, 187-196 ; appari- 
tions of, 213-216, 379 ; as Wisdom 
of God, 228 ; his last Supper, 229- 
236, 345-348 ; as Personal Word 
and High Priest, 244-260, 337 f. 
John the Baptist, 118, 137, 144-151, 
167, 209, 218, 237, 242, 343, 364, 
366; disciples of, 113, 136, 366 
John, the .Apostle, 354, 362, 365-368 
John, Epistles of, 333-341 
John, Revelation of, 304-325 
Joseph and Mary, their children, 

Joshua, 7, 8 

Karma, 25, 26 
Kung-Teng, 25, 41 

Laban, (» 

Lalita Vistara, 15 
Lamaism, 11 

Lamb of God, 204, 210, 340, 365, 

Linus, Pope, 374 

Maccabees, 263, 264 
Maccabean Psalms, 295-297 
Maga or Maya, 4, 9, 23, 25, 31, 33-37 
Magi, 2, 4, 9, 77, 85, 90, 93 
Magic, 5, 6, 8, 9 
Maha Brahma, 19, 48 
Mahomedans, 14 
Maitreya, 49 
Mandasans, 113 
Maim, 4, 9, 46 
Mara, 38-40 
Marcion, 364, 367, 370 
Mary, the Virgin, 24, 109 
Massora, 88 f., 93 
Matarisvan, 56, 104 
Medes, 2, 4, 85 
Merkabah, 11, 12, 87 
Messiah, 25, 40-45; see Angel- 
Messianic prophecies, 108-110 
Metatron, 91, 92, 101, 303 
Millennium, 286-289, 320, 321, 324 
Mithras, 105, 122 . 
Moses, ascension of, 300 
Muratorian list, 371 

Naga, 39, 44 

Naxatras, 21 

Nice, Council of, 348 f. 

Nimrod, 106 

Nirvana, 19,27-33, 43, 45, 47, 64 

Noah, 22 

Oracles, 69 
Ormuzd, 2, 5, 104 f. 
Osiris, 64 

Papias, 272, 324, 362 

Paraclete, 370 

Parsists, 119-135 

Parthians, 14, 80 

Paschal bread and cup, 228 

Paschal dispute, 344-370 

Paschal lamb, 151, 199,213, 221,224, 

228, 233, 332-336, 344-355, 365 
Paschal omer, 151, 173, 174, 199- 

213, 233, 344-355 
Passover or Paschal lamb, 204, 224, 

Paul, 168-240, 344-374, 339, 359, 

Pentecost, 216-220, 371, 375 
Peter, 182, 186, 212, 268, 280, 374- 

Pharis and Pharisees, 86, 92 



Philip, 182 

Philo, 94, 102, 118, 119, 222, 223, 
233, 244, 248, 342, 343, 349 f., 362 
Phoenix, 64 

Pleiades, 6, 21, 64, 66, 105 
Polycarp, 354-358, 366 
Polycrates, 357 
Prashna Paramita, 11, 25, 31 
Pythagoras, 53-76, 83 

Rabbi, 87, 301, 303 

Rahula, 16 

Rechabites,ll, 121,136,261, 271,273 

Revision of the Gospels, 345, 365, 

368, 369, 375 
Rome, burning of, 373-374 

Sabaeans, 113 

Sacrifice, 5, 6, 45, 153-155, 220-238 

Sakas. 13, 14, 15 

Sakya, 41 

Sakya-muni, 13, 15, 46 

Sanchi Tope, 16, 18 

Scythians, 14, 15 

Septuagint, 93-101 

Shebtee, 6, 7 

Shem, 5, 68, 71, 72, 105 

Sibut, 6 

Sibyl, Books of, 297 

Simon of Samaria, 180-182, 343, 

370, 373 
Siva, 13, 39 
SixtusL, Pope, 372 
Soma sacrifice, 107 
Spirit of God, 12, 97, 99, 187-196, 

279, 337, 339 
Sramans, 10 
Stephen, 169-183, 238 
Stephanos Gobaros, 363 
Stranger in Israel, 86, 90, 91, 121, 

138-151, 273, 281 
Synagogue, 88 

Targumim, 89, 93, 101 
Tathagata, 18, 377 
Terah, Teraphim, Ter, 6, 7, 8 
Therapeuts, 113, 133, 135, 169, 173, 

182, 183, 226, 241, 243, 348-352 
Theudas, 367 
Thibet, 14 
Thot, 56 

Transfiguration, 45 
Transmigration of souls, 63 
Tree of life, 225 
Trinity, 59, 338, 359, 374 
Trojan war, 73 
Tuisol, 42 
Twelve, the, 179, 186, 197—207, 

213, 214, 219, 232, 329, 346, 348, 

366, 370-377 

Ur, 6, 7 
Upadana, 47 

Valentinus, 367 
Veda,l, 4, 8, 11 

Vicarious suffering, 49, 50, 153-155, 

Vittal, Vithoba, 13 
Vowel points, 89 

Wisdom, hidden, 88-97, 151-153 
Wisdom, Book of, 98-100, 297 
Word of God, 47, 93, 99, 101, 189- 
193, 244, 251, 260, 277-279, 299, 
301, 304, 313, 315, 334-340, 377 

Yezirah, Book of, 302 

Zendavesta, 2, 3, 11, 19, 29, 104, 

Zeus, 55-62 
Zohar, 300 

Zoroaster, 10, 91, 106, 135 
Zoroastrians, 5, 12 




39 Paternoster Row, E.C. 
London, April 1SS0. 



Messrs. Longmans, Green & Co 


Russia Before and After 

the War. By the Author of 'Society 
in St. Petersburg 5 &c. Translated 
from the German (with later Additions 
by the Author) by Edward Fairfax 
Taylor. Second Edition. Svo. 14^. 

Russia and England from 

1876 to 1880 ; a Protest and an Appeal. 
By O. K. Author of ' Is Russia Wrong?' 
With a Preface by J. A. Froude, M.A. 
Portrait and Maps. 8vo. 14s. 

History of England from 

the Conclusion of the Great War 
in 1815. By Spencer Walpole. 
8vo. Vols. I. & II. 1815-1S32 (Second 
Edition, revised) price 36s. Vol. III. 
1832-1841, price 18s. 

History of England in the 

18th Century. By W. E. H. Lecky, 
M.A. Vols. I. & II. 1700-1760. 

Second Edition. 2 vols. Svo. 36s. 

The History of England 

from the Accession of James II. 

By the Right Mon. Lord Macau lay. 

Student's Edition, 2 vols. cr. Svo. 12s. 
People's Edition, 4 vols. cr. Svo. i6.r. 
Cabinet Edition, 8 vols, post 8vo. 48J. 
Library Edition, 5 vols. 8vo. £4. 

Lord Macaulay's Works. 

Complete and uniform Library Edition. 
Edited by his Sister, Lady Trevelyan. 
8 vols. 8vo. with Portrait, £$. $s. 

Critical and Historical 

Essays contributed to the Edin- 
burgh Review. By the Right Hon. 
Lord Macau lay. 

Cheap Edition, crown Svo. $s. GJ. 
Student's Edition, crown 8vo. 6s. 
People's Edition, 2 vols, crown 8vo. 8j. 
Cabinet Edition, 4 vols. 24s. 

Library Edition, 3 vols. 8) 


The History of England 

from the Fall of Wolsey to the Defeat 
of the Spanish Armada. By J. A. 
Froude, M.A. 

Cabinet Edition, 12 vols, crown, £3. 12s. 
Library Edition, 12 vols, demy, £$. i8j. 

The English in Ireland 

in the Eighteenth Century. By J. A. 

Froude, M.A. 

vols. Svo. £2. Ss. 

Journal of the Reigns of 

King George IV. and King William 
IV. By the late C. C. F. Greville, 
Esq. Edited by H. Reeve, Esq. 
Fifth Edition. 3 vols. Svo. price 36s. 

The Life of Napoleon III. 

derived from Slate Records, Unpub- 
lished Family Correspondence, and 
Personal Testimony. By BLANCHARD 
Jerrold. In Four Volumes, Svo. with 
numerous Portraits and Facsimiles. 
Vols. I. to III. price iSs. each. 

WORKS published by LONGMANS &* CO. 

The Constitutional His- 
tory of England since the Accession 
of George III. 1760-1870. By Sir 
Thomas Erskine May, K.C.B. D.C.L. 
Sixth Edition. 3 vols, crown Svo. iSj. 

Democracy in Europe ; 

a History. By Sir Thomas Erskine 
May, K.C.B. D.C.L. 2 vols. Svo. 32 s. 

Introductory Lectures on 

Modern History delivered in 1841 
and 1842. By the late Thomas 
Arnold, D.D. 8vo. js. 6d. 

On Parliamentary Go- 
vernment in England ; its Origin, 

Development, and Practical Operation. 
By Alpheus Todd. 2 vols. 8vo. 37^. 

History of Civilisation in 

England and France, Spain and 
Scotland. By Henry Thomas 
Buckle. 3 vols, crown Svo. 24^. 

Lectures on the History 

of England from the Earliest Times 
to the Death of King Edward II. 
By W. Longman, F.S.A. Maps and 
Illustrations. Svo. 15J. 

History of the Life & 

Times of Edward III. By W. Long- 
man, F.S.A. With 9 Maps, 8 Plates, 
and 16 Woodcuts. 2 vols. 8vo. 28 s. 

History of the Life and 

Reign of Richard III. Including 
the Story of Perkin Warbeck. By 
James Gairdner. Second Edition, 
Portrait and Map. Crown Svo. 10s. 6d. 

Memoirs of the Civil 

War in Wales and the Marches, 
1642-1649. By John Roland 
PHILLIPS, of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister- 
at-Law. Svo. i6j-. 

History of England un- 
der the Duke of Buckingham and 
Charles I. 1624-1628. By S. R. 

Gardiner. 2 vols. Svo. Maps, 243-, 

The Personal Govern- 
ment of Charles I. from the Death of 
Buckingham to the Declaration in favour 
of Ship Money, 1628-1637. By S. R. 
Gardiner. 2 vols. 8vo. 24?. 

Memorials of the Civil 

War between King Charles I. and the 
Parliament of England as it affected 
Herefordshire and the Adjacent 
Counties. By the Rev. J. Webb, M. A. 
Edited and completed by the Rev. T. 
W. Webb,M.A. 2 vols. Svo. Illustra- 
tions, 42.1-. 

Popular History of 

France, from the Eaidiest Times to 
the Death of Louis XIV. By Miss 
Sewell. Crown 8vo. Maps, Js. 6d. 

A Student's Manual of 

the History of India from the Earliest 
Period to the Present. By Col. 
Meadows Taylor, M.R.A.S. Third 
Thousand. Crown 8vo. Maps, *js. 6d. 

Lord Minto in India ; 

Correspondence of the First Earl of 
Minto, while Governor-General of 
India, from 1807 to 1 8 14. Edited by 
his Great-Niece, the Countess of 
Minto. Completing Lord Minto's 
Life and Letters published in 1874 by 
the Countess of Minto, in Three 
Volumes. Post Svo. Maps, 12s. 

Indian Polity ; a View of 

the System of Administration in India. 
By Lieut.-Col. G. Chesney. 8vo. 21s. 

Waterloo Lectures ; a 

Study of the Campaign of 181 5. By 
Col. C. C. Chesney, R.E. 8vo. 10s. 6d. 

The Oxford Reformers — 

John Colet, Erasmus, and Thomas 
More ; a History of their Fellow-Work. 
By F. Seebohm. Svo. 14^. 

History of the Romans 

under the Empire. By Dean Meri- 
vale, D.D. 8 vols, post 8vo. 48^. 

General History of Rome 

from B.C. 753 to a.d. 476. By Dean 
Merivale, D.D. Crown Svo. Maps, 
price Js. 6d. 

The Fall of the Roman 

Republic ; a Short History of the Last 
Century of the Commonwealth. By 
De?n Mfrtvale, D.D. i2mo. p. 6d. 

WORKS published by LONGMANS & CO. 

The History of Rome. 

By Wilhelm Ihne. Vols. I. to III. 

8vo. price 45.C 

Carthage and the Cartha- 
ginians. By R. Bos worth Smith, 
M.A. Second Edition. Maps, Plans, 
&c. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d. 

The Sixth Oriental Mo- 

narchy ; or, the Geography, History, 
and Antiquities of Parthia. By G. 
Rawlinson, M.A. With Maps and 
Illustrations. 8vo. 16s. 

The Seventh Great Ori- 
ental Monarchy ; or, a History of 
the Sassanians. By G. Rawlinson, 
M.A. With Map and 95 Illustrations. 
8vo. 2&f. 

The History of European 

Morals from Augustus to Charle- 
magne. By W. E. H. Lecky, M.A. 
2 vols, crown 8vo. 16s. 

History of the Rise and 

Influence of the Spirit of Rational- 
ism in Europe. By W. E. H. Lecky, 
M.A. 2 vols, crown 8vo. 16s. 

The History of Philo- 

sophy, from Thales to Comte. By 
George Henry Lewes. Fifth 
Edition. 2 vols. 8vo. 32^. 

A History of Classical 

Greek Literature. By the Rev. T. P. 
Mahaffy, M.A. Trin. Coll. Dublin. 

2 vols, crown Svo. price Js. 6d. each. 

Zeller's Stoics, Epicu- 
reans, and Sceptics. Translated by 
the Rev. O. J. Reichel, M.A. New 
Edition revised. Crown Svo. 15.9. 

Zeller's Socrates & the 

Socratic Schools. Translated by the 
Rev. O. J. Reichel, M.A. Second 
Edition. Crown 8vo. ioj-. Gd. 

Zeller's Plato & the Older 

Academy. Translated by S. Frances 
Alleyne and Alfred Goodwin, 
B.A; Crown Svo. iZs. 

'Aristotle and the Elder Peripatetics' and 'The 
Prse-Socratic Schools,' completing the English 
Edition of Zeller's Work on Ancient Greek 
Philosophy, are preparing for publication. 

Epochs of Modern His- 
tory. Edited by C. COLBECK, M.A. 

Church's Beginning- of the Middle 
Ages, is. Gd. 

Cox's Crusades, 2s. 6d. 

Creighton's Age of Elizabeth, 2s. 6d. 

Gairdner's Houses of Lancaster and 
York, 2s. 6d. 

Gardiner's Puritan Revolution, 2s. 6d. 
Thirty Years' War, 2s. 6d. 

Hale's Fall of the Stuarts, 2s. 6d. 

Johnson's Normans in Europe, 2s. 6d. 

Ludlow's War of American Indepen- 
dence, 2S. 6d. 

Morris's Age of Anne, 2s. 6d. 

Seebohm's Protestant Revolution, 2 6. 

Stubbs's Early Plantagenets, 2s. 6d. 

Warburton's Edward 1 1 1. 2s. 6d. 

Epochs of Ancient His- 
tory. Edited by the Rev. Sir G. W. 
Cox, Bart. M.A. & C. Sankey, M.A. 

Beesly's Gracchi, Marius & Sulla, 2s.6d. 

Capes's Age of the Antonines, 2s. 6d. 
- Early Roman Empire, 2s. 6d. 

Cox's Athenian Empire, 2s. 6d. 

Greeks & Persians, 2s. Gd. 

Curteis's Macedonian Empire, 2s. 6d. 

Ihne's Rome to its Capture by the 
Gauls, 2s. 6d. 

Merivale's Roman Triumvirates, 2s. 6d. 

Sankey's Spartan & Theban Supre- 
macies, 2s. 6d. 

Creighton's Shilling His- 

tory of England, introductory t>> 

'Epochs of English History.' Fcp. 
8vo. is. 

Epochs of English His- 
tory. Edited by the Rev. MANDELL 
Creighton, M.A. Fcp. Svo. $s. 

Browning's Modern England, 1820- 
1874, 9<£ 

Cordery's Struggle against Absolute 
Monarchy, 1603-1688, gd. 

Creighton's (Mrs.) England a Conti- 
nental Power, 1066-1216, gd. 

Creighton's (Rev. M.) Tudors and the 
Reformation, 1485-1603, gd. 

Rowley's Rise of the People, 1215-1485, 
price gd. 

Rowley's Settlement of the Constitu- 
tion, 1688-1778, gd. 

Tancock's England during the Ameri- 
can & European Wars, 1778-1820, gd 

York-Powell's Early England to the 
Conquest, is. 

WORKS published by LONGMANS 6- CO. 

The Student's Manual of iThe Student's Manual of 

Ancient History; the Political History, Modern History; the Rise and Pro- 
Geography and Social State of the gress of the Principal European Nations. 
Principal Nations of Antiquity. ByW. By W. Cooke Taylor, LL.D. Crown 
Cooke Taylor, LL.D. Cr. 8vo. js.6d. 8vo. js. 6d. 

The Life of Henry Venn, I Felix Mendelssohn'sLet- 

B.D. Prebendary of St. Paul's, and 
Hon. Sec. of the Church Missionary 
Society ; with Extracts from his Letters 
and Papers. By the Rev. W. Knight, 
M.A. With an Introduction by the 
Rev. J. Venn, M.A. [Just ready. 

Memoirs of the Life of 

Anna Jameson, Author of ' Sacred and 
Legendary Art ' &c. By her Niece, 
Gerardine Macpherson. 8vo. with 
Portrait, 12s. 6d. 

Isaac Casaubon, 1559- 

1614. By Mark Pattison, Rector 
of Lincoln College, Oxford. Svo. iSs. 

The Life and Letters of 

Lord Macaulay. By his Nephew, 

G. Otto Trevelyan, M.P. 
Cabinet Edition, 2 vols, crown 8vo. 125-. 
Library Edition, 2 vols. 8vo. 36^. 

The Life of Sir Martin 

Frobisher, Knt. containing a Narra- 
tive of the Spanish Armada. By the 
Rev. Frank Jones, B.A. Portrait, 
Maps, and Facsimile. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

The Life, Works, and 

Opinions of Heinrich Heine. By 

William Stigand. 
Portrait, 28J. 

vols. Svo. 

The Life of Mozart. 

Translated from the German Work of 
2 vols, crown Svo. Portraits, 21s. 

The Life of Simon de 

Montfort, Earl of Leicester, with 

special reference to the Parliamentary 
History of his time. By G. W. 
P rot hero. Crown Svo. Maps, ox. 

Lers, translated by Lady Wallace. 
2 vols, crown Svo. $s. each. 

Autobiography. By John 

Stuart Mill. Svo. *]s. 6d. 

Apologia pro Vita Sua ; 

Being a History of his Religious 
Opinions by John Henry Newman, 
D.D. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

Leaders of Public Opi- 
nion in Ireland ; Swift, Flood, 
Grattan, O'Connell. By W. E. H. 
Lecky, M.A. Crown Svo. Js. 6d. 

Essays in Ecclesiastical 

Biography. By the Right Hon. Sir J. 
Stephen, LL.D. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 

Caesar; a Sketch. By James 

Anthony Froude, M.A. formerly 
Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford. 
With Portrait and Map. 8vo. 16s. 

Life of the Duke of Wel- 
lington. By the Rev. G. R. Gleig, 
M.A. Crown Svo. Portrait, 6s. 

Memoirs of Sir Henry 

Havelock, K.C.B. By John Clark 
Marshman. Crown 8vo. 2 s - &/. 

Vicissitudes of Families. 

By Sir Bernard Burke, C.B. Two 
vols, crown Svo. 2i.r. 

Maunder's Treasury of 

Biography, reconstructed and in great 
part re-written, with above 1,600 ad 
ditional Memoirs by W. L. R. CATES, 
Fcp. 8vo. 6s. 

WORKS published by LONGMANS d- CO. 


Comte's System of Posi- 
tive Polity, or Treatise upon Socio- 
logy :— 
Vol. I. General View of Positivism and 
Introductory Principles. Translated by 
J. II. Bridges, M.B. Svo. 21s. 

Vol. II. The Social Statics, or the 
Abstract Laws of Human Order. Trans- 
lated by F. Harrison, M.A. Svo. 14J. 

Vol. III. The Social Dynamics, or 
the General Laws of Human Progress (the 
Philosophy of History). Translated by 
E. S. Beesly, INI. A. 8vo. 21s. 

Vol. IV. The Theory of the Future 
of Man ; with Comte's Early Essays on 
Social Philosophy. Translated by R. Con- 
greve, M.D. and II. D. IIutton, B.A. 
Svo. 24.C 

De Tocqueville's Demo- 
cracy in America, translated by H. 
Reeve. 2 vols, crown Svo. 16s. 

Analysis of the Pheno- 
mena of the Human Mind. By 
James Mill. With Notes, Illustra- 
tive and Critical. 2 vols. 8vo. 28.C 

On Representative Go- 
vernment. By John Stuart Mill. 

Crown 8vo. 2s. 

On Liberty. By John 

Stuart Mill. Tost 8vo. 7^. 6d. 
crown Svo. is. 4</. 

Principles of Political 

Economy. By John Stuart Mill. 
2 vols. Svo. 30s. or 1 vol. crown 8vo. $s. 

Essays on some Unset- 
tied Questions of Political Economy. 
By John Stuart Mill. 8vo. 6s. 6d. 

Utilitarianism. By John 

Stuart Mill. Svo. $s. 

The Subjection of Wo- 

men. By John Stuart Mill. Fourth 
Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. 

Examination of Sir Wil- 
liam Hamilton's Philosophy. By 
John Stuart Mill. Svo. 16s. 

A System of Logic, Ra- 

tiocinative and Inductive. By JOHN 
Stuart Mill. 2 vols. Svo. 25J. 

Dissertations and Dis- 
cussions. By John Stuart Mill. 

4 vols. 8vo. £2. 7 j. 

The A B C of Philosophy ; 

a Text-Book for Students. By the 
Rev. T. Griffith, M.A. Prebendary 
of St. Paul's. Crown Svo. 5''. 

Philosophical Fragments 

written during- intervals of Business. 
By J. D. Morell, LL.D. Crown 
Svo. 5j. 

Path and Goal ; a Discus- 
sion on the Elements of Civilisation 

and the Conditions of Happiness. By 
M. M. Kaliscu, Ph.D. M.A. Svo'. 
price 12s. 6d. 

The Law of Nations con- 
sidered as Independent Political 
Communities. By Sir Travers 
Twtss, D.CL. 2 vols. Svo. £1. i3>\ 

A Systematic View of the 

Science of Jurisprudence. By Shel- 
don Amos, M.A. 8vo. iSj-. 

A Primer of the English 

Constitution and Government. By 
S. Amos, M.A. Crown Svo. 6s. 

Fifty Years of the English 

Constitution, 1830-1880. By Shel- 
don Amos, M.A. Crown Svo.' 10s. 6d. 

Principles of Economical 

Philosophy. By H. D. Macleod, 
M.A. Second Edition in 2 vols. Vol. 
I. Svo. 155-. Vol. II. Part i. \2s. 

Lord Bacon's Works, col- 
lected & edited by R. L. Ellis, M.A. 
J. Spedding, M.A. and 1). 1). Heath. 

7 vols. Svo. £1. 13.C 6d. 

Letters and Life of Fran- 

cis Bacon, including all his Occasional 
Works. Collected and edited, with a 
Commentary, by 1. Spedding. 7 vols. 
Svo. £4. 4s. 

WORKS published by LONGMANS & CO. 

The Institutes of Jus- 
tinian ; with English Introduction, 
Translation, and Notes. By T. C. 
Sandars, M.A. 8vo. iSs. 

The Nicomachean Ethics 

of Aristotle, translated into English 
by R. Williams, B.A. Crown Svo. 
price Js. 6d. 

Aristotle's Politics, Books 

I. III. IV. (VII.) Greek Text, with 
an English Translation by W. E. Bol- 
land, M.A. and Short Essays by A. 
Lang, M.A. Crown 8vo. p. 6d. 

The Politics of Aristotle ; 

Greek Text, with English Notes. By 
Richard Congreve, M.A. 8vo. iSs. 

The Ethics of Aristotle ; 

with Essays and Notes. By Sir A. 
Grant, Bart. LL.D. 2 vols. 8vo. 32J. 

Bacon's Essays, with An- 
notations. By R. Whately, D.D. 
8vo. 1 as-. 6d. 

Picture Logic ; an Attempt 

to Popularise the Science of Reasoning. 
By A. Swinbourne, B.A. PostSvo. $s. 

Elements of Logic. By 

R. Whately, D.D. 8vo. iar. 6d. 
Crown Svo. 4s. 6d. 

Elements of Rhetoric. 

By R. Whately, D.D. Svo. \os. 6d. 
Crown Svo. 45-. 6d. 

On the Influence of Au- 
thority in Matters of Opinion. By 

the late Sir. G. C.Lewis, Bart. Svo. 14*. 

The Senses and the In- 
tellect. By A. Bain, LL.D. Svo. 15^. 

The Emotions and the 

Will. By A. Bain, LL.D. Svo. 15s. 

Mental and Moral Sci- 
ence ; a Compendium of Psychology 
and Ethics. By A. Bain, LL.D. 
Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d. 

An Outline of the Neces- 
sary Laws of Thought ; a Treatise 
on Pure and Applied Logic. By W. 
Thomson, D.D. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

Essays in Political and 

Moral Philosophy. By T. E. Cliffe 
Leslie, Hon. LL.D. Dubl. of Lincoln's 
Inn, Barrister-at-Law. 8vo. ios.- 6d. 

Hume's Philosophical 

Works. Edited, with Notes, &c. by 
T. H. Green, M.A. and the Rev. 
T. H. Grose, M. A. 4 vols. 8vo. $6s. 
Or separately, Essays, 2 vols. 28^. 
Treatise on Human Nature, 2 vols. 28s. 

Lectures on German 

Thought. Six Lectures on the History 
and Prominent Features of German 
Thought during the last Two Hundred 
Years, delivered at the Royal Insti- 
tution of Great Britain. By Karl 
Hillebrand. Rewritten and enlarged. 
Crown Svo. Js. 6d. 


Selected Essays, chiefly 

from Contributions to the Edinburgh 
and Quarterly Reviews. By A. Hay- 
yvard, Q.C. 2 vols, crown Svo. 12s. 

Miscellaneous Writings 

of J. Conington, M.A. Edited by 
J. A. SYMONDS, M.A. 2 vols. 8vo. 2%s. 

Short Studies on Great 

Subjects. By J. A. Fkoude, M, A. 

Literary Studies. By the 

late Walter Bagehot, M.A. Fellow 
of University College, London. Edited, 
with a Prefatory Memoir, by R. II. 
Hutton. Second Edition. 2 vols. 
8vo. with Portrait, 2$s. 

Manual of English Lite- 
rature, Historical and Critical. By 
T. Arnold, M.A. Crown 8vo. js. 6d. 

The Wit and Wisdom of 

the Rev. Sydney Smith. Crown 
Svo. 2s. 6d. 

WORKS published by LONGMANS &> CO. 

Lord Macaulay's Miscel- 
laneous Writings : — 

Library Edition, 2 vols. 8vo. 21s. 
People's Edition, i vol. cr. 8vo. 4s. 6d. 

Lord Maeaulay's Miscel- 
laneous "Writings and Speeches. 

Student's Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. 

Speeches of the Right 

Hon. Lord Macaulay, corrected by 
Himself. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d, 

Selections from the Wri- 
tings of Lord Macaulay. Edited, 
with Notes, by G. O. Trevelyan, 
M.P. Crown. 8vo. 6s. 

Miscellaneous and Post- 
humous Works of the late Henry 
Thomas Buckle. Edited by Helen 
Taylor. 3 vols. Svo. 52s. 6d. 

Miscellaneous Works of 

Thomas Arnold, D.D. late Head 

Master of Rugby School. Svo. Js. 6d. 

The Pastor's Narrative; 

or, before and after the Battle of 
Worth, 1870. By Pastor Klein. 
Translated by Mrs. F. E. Marshall. 
Crown Svo. Map, 6s. 

German Home Life ; a 

Series of Essays on the Domestic Life 
of Germany. Crown Svo. 6s. 

Realities of Irish Life. 

By W. Steuart Trench. Crown 
Svo. 2s. 6d. boards, or 3-y. 6d. cloth. 

Two Lectures on South 

Africa delivered before the Philoso- 
phical Institute, Edinburgh, Jan. 6&9, 
1880. By. James Anthony Froude, 
M.A. 8vo. y. 

Cetshwayo's Dutchman ; 

the Private Journal of a White Trader 
in Zululand during the British Invasion. 

By Cornelius Vijx. Translated and 
edited with Preface and Notes by the 
Right Rev. J. W. Coli-nso, D.D. 
Bishop of Natal. Crown Svo. Por- 
trait, $s. 

Apparitions ; a Narrative 

of Facts. By the Rev. P. W. Savin., 
.M.A. Second Edition. Crown Svo. 

price 5<\ 

Max Miiller and the 

Philosophy of Language. By 


Lectures on the Science 

of Language. By F. Max MC'ller, 
M.A. 2 vols, crown 8vo. 16s. 

Chips from a German 

Workshop ; Essays o;i the Science of 
Religion, and on Mythology, Traditions 
& Customs. By-F. Max Muller, 
M.A. 4 vols. Svo. £2. i8j. 

Language & Languages. 

A Revised Edition of Chapters on Lan- 
guage and Families of Speech. By 
F. W. Farrar, D.D. F.R.S. Crown 
Svo. 6s. 

The Essays and Contri- 
butions of A. K. H. B. Uniform 

Cabinet Editions in crown Svo. 

Recreations of a Country Parson, Three 
Series, 3s. 6d. each. 

Landscapes, Churches, and Moralities, 

price 3s. 6d. 

Seaside Musings, 3s. 6d. 

Changed Aspects of Unchanged 
Truths, 3s. 6d. 

Counsel and Comfort from a City 
Pulpit, 3x. 6d. 

Lessons of Middle Age, 3s. 6d. 

Leisure Hours in Town, 3c 6d. 

Autumn Holidays of a Country Parson, 
price 3-r. 6d. 

Sunday Afternoons at the Parish 
Church of a University City, 3s. 6d. 

The Commonplace Philosopher in 
Town and Country, y. 6d. 

Present-Day Thoughts, 3s. 6d. 

Critical Essays of a Country Parson, 
price 3s. 6d. 

The Graver Thoughts of a Country 
Parson, Three Scries, 3s. 6d. each. 

WORKS published by LONGMANS & CO. 



One-Volume Dictionary 

of the English Language. By R. 
G. Latham, M.A. M.D. Medium 
Svo. z\s. 

Larger Dictionary of 

the English Language. By R. G. 
Latham, M.A. M.D. Founded on 
Johnson's English Dictionary as edited 
by the Rev. H. J. Todd. 4vols. 4to. £7. 

Roget's Thesaurus of 

English Words and Phrases, classi- 
fied and arranged so as to facilitate the 
expression of Ideas, and assist in 
Literary Composition. Revised and 
enlarged by the Author's Son, J. L. 
Roget. Crown Svo. \os. 6d. 

English Synonymes. By 

E. J. Whately. Edited by R. 
Whately, D.D. Fcp. Svo. $s. 

Handbook of the English 

Language. By R. G. Latham, M.A. 
M.D. Crown Svo. 6s. 

Contanseau's Practical 

Dictionary of the French and English 
Languages. Post Svo. price Js. 6d. 

Contanseau's Pocket 

Dictionary, French and English, 
abridged from the Practical Dictionary 
by the Author. Square l8mo. 3s. 6d. 

A Practical Dictionary 

of the German and English Lan- 
guages. By Rev. W. L. Blackley, 
M.A. & Dr. C. M. Friedlander. 
Post 8vo. Js. 6d. 

A New Pocket Diction- 
ary of the German and English 
Languages. By F. W. Longman, 
Ball. Coll. Oxford. Square 181110. 5^. 

Becker's Gallus ; Roman 

Scenes of the Time of Augustus. 
Translated by the Rev. F. METCALFE, 

Becker's Charicles; 

Illustrations of the Private Life of 
the Ancient Greeks. Translated by 
the Rev. F. Metcalfe, M.A. Post 
8vo. 7* 6d. 

A Dictionary of Roman 

and Greek Antiquities. With 2,000 
Woodcuts illustrative of the Arts and 
Life of the Greeks and Romans. By 
A. Rich, B.A. Corn Svo. Js. 6d. 

A Greek-English Lexi- 
con. By Ff. G. Liddell, D.D. Dean 
of Christchurch, and R. SCOTT, D.D. 
Dean of Rochester. Crown 4to. 36^. 

Liddell & Scott's Lexi- 

con, Greek and English, abridged for 
Schools. Square i2mo. js. 6d. 

An English-Greek Lexi- 
con, containing all the Greek Words 
used by Writers of good authority. By 
C. D. Yonge, M.A. 4to. 21 s. School 
Abridgment, square i2mo. 8s. 6d. 

A Latin-English Diction- 
ary. By John T. White, D.D. 
Oxon. and J. E. Riddle, M.A. Oxon. 
Sixth Edition, revised. Quarto 2 is. 

White's College Latin- 

English Dictionary, for the use of 
University Students. Royal Svo. 12s. 

M'Culloch's Dictionary 

of Commerce and Commercial Navi- 
gation. Re-edited, with a Supplement 
shewing the Progress of British Com- 
mercial Legislation to the Year 18S0, 
by Hugh G. Reid. With 11 Maps 
and 30 Charts. Svo. 63s. The Supple- 
ment separately, price 5-r. 

Keith Johnston's General 

Dictionary of Geography, Descriptive, 
Physical, Statistical, and Historical ; 
a complete Gazetteer of the World. 
Medium 8vo. 42s. 

The Public Schools Atlas 

of Ancient Geography, in 28 entirely 
new Coloured Maps. Edited by the 
Rev. G. Butler, M.A. Imperial 8vo. 
or imperial 4to. *]s. 6d. 

The Public Schools Atlas 

of Modern Geography, in 31 entirely 
new Coloured Maps. Edited by the 
Rev. G.Butler, M.A. Uniform, 5s, 

WORKS published by LONGMANS 6- CO. 


Outlines of Astronomy. 

By Sir J. F. W. IIerschel, Bart. M.A. 
Latest Edition, with Plates and Dia- 
grams. Square crown 8vo. \2s. 

Essays on Astronomy. 

A Series of Papers on Planets and 
Meteors, the Sun and Sun-surrounding 
Space, Stars and Star Cloudlets. By 
R. A. Proctor, B.A. With 10 Plates 
and 24 Woodcuts. 8vo. \2s. 

The Moon ; her Motions,. 

Aspects, Scenery, and Physical Con- 
dition. By R. A. Proctor, B.A. 
With Plates, Charts, Woodcuts, and 
Lunar Photographs. Crown 8vo. \os.6d. 

The Sun ; Ruler, Light, Fire, 

and Life of the Planetary System. By 
R. A. Proctor, B.A. With Plates & 
Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 14s. 

The Orbs Around Us ; 

a Series of Essays on the Moon & 
Planets, Meteors & Comets, the Sun & 
Coloured Pairs of Suns. By R. A. 
Proctor, B.A. With Chart and Dia- 
grams. Crown 8vo. Js. 6d. 

Other Worlds than Ours ; 

The Plurality of Woi.ds Studied under 
the Light of Recent Scientific Re- 
searches. By R. A. Proctor, B.A. 
With 14 Illustrations. Cr. 8vo. 10s. 6d. 

The Universe of Stars ; 

Presenting Researches into and New 
Views respecting the Constitution of 
the Heavens. By R. A. Proctor, 
B.A. Second Edition, with 22 Charts 
(4 Coloured) and 22 Diagrams. 8vo. 
price I Of. 6d. 

The Transits of Venus ; 

A Popular Account of Past and Coming 
Transits. By R. A. Proctor, B.A. 
20 Plates (12 Coloured) and 27 Wood- 
cuts. Crown 8vo. Ss. 6d. 

Saturn and its System. 

By R. A. Proctor, B.A. Svo. with 
14 Plates, 14J. 

The Moon, and the Con- 
dition and Configurations of its Surface. 
By E. Nelson, F.R.A.S. With 26 
Maps &5 Plates. Medium 8vo. 31 s, 6d. 

A New Star Atlas, for the 

Library, the School, and the Obser- 
vatory, in 12 Circular Maps (with 2 
Index Plates). By R. A. Proctor, 
B.A. Crown Svo. $ s . 

Larger Star Atlas, for the 

Library, in Twelve Circular Maps, 
with Introduction and 2 Index Plates. 
By R. A. Proctor, B.A. Folio, 15s. 
or Maps only, 12s. 6d. 

A Treatise on the Cy- 
cloid, and on all forms of Cycloidal 
Curves, and on the use of Cycloidal 
Curves in dealing with the Motions of 
Planets, Comets, &c. and of Matter 
projected from the Sun. By R. A. 
Proctor, B.A. With 161 Diagrams. 
Crown Svo. io.e. 6d. 

Dove's Law of Storms, 

considered in connexion with the 
Ordinary Movements of the Atmo- 
sphere. Translated by R. H. SCOTT, 
M.A. 8vo. 1 or. 6d. 

Air and Rain ; the Begin- 
nings of a Chemical Climatology. By 
R. A. Smith, F.R.S. Svo. 24s. 

Sch ell en's Spectrum 

Analysis, in its Application to Terres- 
trial Substances and the Physical 
Constitution of the Heavenly Bodies. 
Translated by Jane and C. Lassell, 
with Notes by W. Huggins, LL.D. 
F. R. S. 8vo. Plates and Woodcuts, 28^. 


WORKS published by LONGMANS &> CO. 


Professor H e 1 m h o 1 1 z ' 

Popular Lectures on Scientific Sub- 
jects. Translated by E. Atkinson, 
F. C. S. With numerous Wood Engrav- 
ings. 8vo. I2-5-. 6d. 

Professor Helmholtz on 

the Sensations of Tone, as a Physio- 
logical Basis for the Theory of Music. 
Translated by A. J. Ellis, F.R.S. 

Ganot's Natural Philo- 
sophy for General Readers and 
Young- Persons ; a Course of Physics 
divested of Mathematical Formula; and 
expressed in the language of daily life. 
Translated by E. Atkinson, F.C.S. 
Third Edition. Plates and Woodcuts. 
Crown 8vo. "]s. 6d. 

Ganot's Elementary 

Treatise on Physics, Experimental 
and Applied, for the use of Colleges 
and Schools. Translated by E. Atkin- 
son, F.C.S. Ninth Edition. Plates 
and Woodcuts. Targe crown 8vo. 15^. 

Arnott's Elements of Phy- 
sics or Natural Philosophy. Seventh 
Edition, edited by A. Bain, LL.D. 
and A. S. Taylor, M.D. F.R.S. 
Crown 8vo. Woodcuts, 12s. 6d. 

The Correlation of Phy- 
sical Forces. By the Hon. Sir W. 
R. Grove, F.R.S. &c. Sixth Edition, 
revised and augmented. Svo. \$s. 

Weinhold's Introduction 

to Experimental Physics ; including 
Directions for Constructing Physical 
Apparatus and for Making Experiments. 
Translated by B. Loewy, F.R.A.S. 
Svo. Plates & Woodcuts 31.C 6d. 

A Treatise on Magnet- 
ism, General and Terrestrial. By H. 
Lloyd, D.D. D.C.L. Svo. ior. 6d. 

Elementary Treatise 

the Wave-Theory of Light. 



If. Lloyo, D.D. D.C.L. 8vo. ioj. 6d. 

Fragments of Science. 

By John Tyndall, F.R.S. Sixth 
Edition, revised and augmented. 2 vols, 
crown Svo. i6x. 

Heat a Mode of Motion. 

By John Tyndall, F.R.S. Fifth 
Edition in preparation. 

Sound. By John Tyndall, 

F.R.S. Third Edition, including 
Recent Researches on Fog- Signalling. 
Crown 8vo. price 10s. 6d. 

Contributions to Mole- 
cular Physics in the domain of 
Radiant Heat. By John Tyndall, 
F.R.S. Plates and Woodcuts. Svo. 16^. 

ProfeSSOr Tyndall's Re- 
searches on Diamagnetism and 
Magne-Crystallic Action ; including 
Diamagnetic Polarity. New Edition 
in preparation. 

Professor Tyndall's Lec- 
tures on Light, delivered in America 
in 1872 and 1873. With Portrait, Plate 
& Diagrams. Crown Svo. Js. 6d. 

Professor Tyndall's Les- 
sons in Electricity at the Royal 
Institution, 1875-6. With 58 Wood- 
cuts. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. 

ProfessorTyndall's Notes 

of a Course of Seven Lectures on 
Electrical Phenomena and Theo- 
ries, delivered at the Royal Institution. 
Crown Svo. is. sewed, is. 6d. cloth. 

ProfessorTyndall's Notes 

of a Course of Nine Lectures on 
Light, delivered at the Royal Institu- 
tion. Crown 8vo. is. swd., is.6d. cloth. 

Principles of Animal Me- 
chanics. By the Rev. S. Haughton, 
F.R.S. Second Edition. Svo. 2is. 

WORKS published by LONGMANS c~ CO. 

T I 

Text-Books of Science, 

Mechanical and Physical, adapted for 
the use of Artisans and of Students in 
Public and Science Schools. Small 
8vo. with Woodcuts, &c. 

Abney's Photography, 3s. 6d. 
Anderson's (Sir John) Strength of Ma- 
terials, 3s. 6d. 
Armstrong's Organic Chemistry, $s. 6d. 
Barry's Railway Appliances, p. 6d. 
Bloxam's Metals, 3s. 6d. 
Goodeve's Mechanics, 3s. 6d. 



Gore's Electro-Metallurgy, 6s. 
Griffin's Algebra & Trigonometry, 3/6. 
Jenkin's Electricity & Magnetism, 3/6. 
Maxwell's Theory of Heat, 3s. 6d. 
Merrifield's Technical Arithmetic, 3s. 6d. 
Miller's Inorganic Chemistry, 3*. 6d. 
Preece & Sivewright's Telegraphy, 3/6. 
Rutley's Study of Rocks, 4s. 6d. 
Shelley's Workshop Appliances, 3s. 6d. 
Thome's Structural and Physiological 

Botany, 6s. 
Thorpe's Quantitative Analysis, 4s. 6d. 

Thorpe & Muir's Qualitative Analysis, 

price 3s. 6d. 
Tilden's Chemical Philosophy, 


Unwin's Machine Design, 3s. 6d. 
Watson's Plane & Solid Geometry, 3/6. 

Light Science for Leisure 

Hours ; Familiar Essays on Scientific 
Subjects, Natural Phenomena, &c. 
By R. A. Proctor, B.A. 2 vols, 
crown 8vo. Js. 6d. each. 

An Introduction to the 

Systematic Zoology and Morpho- 
logy of Vertebrate Animals. By A. 
MACALISTER, M.J). With 28 Dia- 
grams. Svo. 10s. 6d. 

The Comparative Ana- 
tomy and Physiology of the Verte- 
brate Animals. By Richard Owen, 

F.R.S. With 1,472 Woodcuts. 3 
vols. 8vo. £3. 13^. 6d. 

Homes without Hands ; 

a Description of the Habitations of 
Animals, classed according to their 
Principle of Construction. By the Rev. 
J. G. Wood, M.A. With about 140 
Vignettes on Wood. Svo. 14J. 

Wood's Strange Dwell- 
ings; a Description of the Habitations 
of Animals, abridged from ' Homes 
without Hands.' With Frontispiece 1 " 
and 60 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. Js. 6d. 

Wood's Insects at Home; 

a Popular Account of British Insects, 
their Structure, Plabits, and Trans- 
formations. Svo. Woodcuts, 14J. 

Wood's Insects Abroad ; 

a Popular Account of Foreign Insects, 
their Structure, Habits, and Trans- 
formations. Svo. Woodcuts, 14 j. 

Wood's Out of Doors ; a 

Selection of Original Articles on 
Practical Natural History. With 6 
Illustrations. Crown Svo. Js. 6d. 

Wood's Bible Animals ; a 

description of every Living Creature 
mentioned in the Scriptures, from the 
Ape to the Coral. With 112 Vignettes. 
8vo. 14s. 

The Sea and its Living 

Wonders. By Dr. G. Hartwig. 
Svo. with many Illustrations, 10s. 6d. 

Hart wig's Tropical 

World. With about 200 Illustrations. 
Svo. 1 or. 6d. 

Hartwig's Polar World ; 

a Description of Man and Nature in the 
Arctic and Antarctic Regions of the 
Globe. Maps, Plates & Woodcuts. 
8vo. 1 05. 6d. 

Hartwig's Subterranean 

World. With Maps and Woodcuts. 

Svo. io.f. 6d. 

Hartwig's Aerial World; 

a Popular Account of the Phenomena 
and Life of the Atmosphere. Map, 
Plates, Woodcuts. 8vo. ioc. 6J. 

WORKS published by LONGMANS &> CO. 

Kirby and Spence's In- 
troduction to Entomology, or Ele- 
ments of the Natural History of Insects. 
Crown Svo. 5^. 

A Familiar History of 

Birds. By E. Stanley, D.D. Fcp. 
8vo. with Woodcuts, 3^. 6d. 

' Rural Bird Life ; Essays ; 

on Ornithology, with Instructions for 
Preserving Objects relating to that 
Science. By Charles Dixon. With 
Coloured Frontispiece and 44 Wood- | 
cuts by G. Pearson. Crown Svo. 7-r. 6d. 
cloth extra, gilt edges. 

Rocks Classified and De- 
scribed. By Bernhard Von Cotta. 

An English Translation, by P. H. 
Lawrence, with English, German, and 
French Synonymes. Post Svo. 14s. 

The Geology of England 

and Wales ; a Concise Account of \ 
the Lithological Characters, Leading I 
Fossils, and Economic Products of the 
Rocks. By H. B. Woodward, F.G.S. | 
Crown Svo. Map & Woodcuts, 14*. 

Keller's Lake Dwellings 

of Switzerland, and other Parts of 
Europe. Translated by John E. Lee, ! 
F.S.A. F.G.S. With 206 Ulustra- ' 
tions. 2 vols, royal Svo. 4.2s. 

Heer's Primaeval World 

of Switzerland. Edited by James 
Heywood, M.A. F.R.S. With Map, 
19 Plates, & 372 Woodcuts. 2 vols. 
8vo. 16s. 

The Puzzle of Life and 

How it Has Been Put Together ; a 
Short History of Praehistoric Vegetable 
and Animal Life on the Earth. By A. 
NlCOLS, F.R.G.S. With 12 Illustra- 
tion.. Crown Svo. y. 6d. 

I he Origin of Civilisa- 
tion, and the Primitive Condition of 
Man ; Mental and Social Condition of 
Savages. By Sir J. Lubbock, Bart. 
M.P. F.R.S. 8vo. Woodcuts, i&. 

A Dictionary of Science, 

Literature, and Art. Re-edited by 
the late W. T. Brande (the Author) 
and the Rev. Sir G. W. Cox, Bart. M.A. 
3 vols, medium 8vo. 6y. 

Hullah's Course of Lec- 
tures on the History of Modern 
Music. Svo. Sj. 6d. 

Hullah's Second Course 

of Lectures on the Transition Period 
cf Musical History. Svo. iar. 6d. 

Loudon's Encyclopaedia 

of Plants ; comprising the Specific 
Character, Description, Culture, His- 
tory, &c. of all the Plants found in 
Great Britain. With upwards of 
12,000 Woodcuts. Svo. 42s. 

De Caisne & Le Maout's 

Descriptive and Analytical Botany. 
Translated by Mrs. Hooker ; . edited 
and arranged by J. D. Hooker, M.D. 
With 5,500 Woodcuts. Imperial 8vo. 
price 3IJ-. 6d. 

Rivers's Orchard-House ; 

or, the Cultivation of Fruit Trees under 
Glass. Sixteenth Edition, re-edited by 
T. F. Rivers. Crown Svo. with 25 
Woodcuts, 5 j. 

The Rose Amateur's 

Guide. By Thomas Rivers. Latest 
Edition. Fcp. Svo. 4^ 6d. 

Town and Window Gar- 
dening, including the Structure, Habits 
and Uses of Plants. By Mrs. Buckton 
With 127 Woodcuts. Crown Svo. 2s. 

WORKS published by LONGMANS <S- CO. 


Practical Chemistry ; the j 

Principles of Qualitative Analysis. J 
By W. A. TlLDEN, D.Sc. Lond. F.C.S. 
Professor of Chemistry in Mason's Col- J 
lege, Birmingham. Pep. Svo. is. 6d. 

Miller's Elements of Che- ' 

mistry, Theoretical and Practical. 
Re-edited, with Additions, by H. 
Macleod, F.C.S. 3 vols. Svo. 

Part I. Chemical Physics. i6s. 
Part II. Inorganic Chemistry, 24^. 
Part III. Organic Chemistry, 31J. 6d. 

Annals of Chemical Me- 
dicine ; including the Application of 
Chemistry to Physiology, Pathology, 
Therapeutics, Pharmacy, Toxicology, 
and Hygiene. Edited by J. L. W. 
Thudichum, M.D. Vol.1. 8vo. 14-r. 

Health in the House : 

Twenty-five Lectures on Elementary 
Physiology in its Application to the 
Daily Wants of Man and Animals. 
By Mrs. Buckton. Crown 8vo. 

Woodcuts, 2S. 


A Dictionary of Chemis- 
try and the Allied Branches of other 
Sciences. By Henry Watts, F.C.S. 

assisted by eminent Scientific and 
Practical Chemists. 7 vols, medium 
8vo. £vo. ids. 6d. 

Third Supplement, completing the 
Record of Chemical Discovery to the 
year 1877. Part I. Svo. 36^. Part 1 1. 
completion, in the press. 

Select Methods in Che- 
mical Analysis, chiefly Inorganic. By 
Wm. Crookes, F.R.S. With 22 
Woodcuts. Crown Svo. 12s. 6c/. 

The History, Products, 

and Processes of the Alkali Trade, 

including the most recent Improve- 
ments. By Charles T. Kingzett, 
F.C.S. With 32 Woodcuts. Svo. 12s. 

Animal Chemistry, or the 

Relations of Chemistry to Physiology 
and Pathology : a Manual for Medical 
Men and Scientific Chemists. By 
Charles T. Kingzett, F.C.S. Svo. 
price iSs. 



In Fairyland ; Pictures 

from the Elf-World. By Richard 
Doyle. With 16 coloured Plates, 
containing 36 Designs. Folio, 15^. 

Lord Macaulay's Lays of 

Ancient Rome. With Ninety Illustra- 
tions on Wood from Drawings by G. 
Scharf. Fcp. 4to. 21s. 

Miniature Edition of 

Macaulay's Lays of Ancient Rome, 
with Scharf 's 90 Illustrations reduced 
in Lithography. Imp. i6mo. 10s. 6d. 

Moore's Lalla Rookh. 

Tenniel's Edition, with 68 Woodcut 
Illustrations. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d. 

Moore's Irish Melodies, 

Maclise's Edition, with 161 Steel 
Plates. Super- royal 8vo. 21s. 

Lectures on Harmony, 

delivered at the Royal Institution. By 
G. A. Macfarren. Svo. \2$, 

Sacred and Legendary 

Art. By Mrs. Jameson. 6 vols, 
square crown Svo. £$. 15^. 6d. 

Jameson's Legends of the 

Saints and Martyrs. With 19 Etch- 
ings and 1S7 Woodcuts. 2 vols. 31J. 6d. 

Jameson's Legends of the 

Monastic Orders. With 11 Etchings 
and 88 Woodcuts. I vol. 2i.r. 

Jameson's Legends of the 

Madonna. With 27 Etchings and 165 

Woodcuts. I VOl. 2Ij\ 

Jameson's History of the 

Saviour, Til.; Types and Precursors. 
Complete;! by Lady Eastlake. With 
13 Etc! imgs and 281 Woodcuts. 
2 vols. 42s. 

The Three Cathedrals 

dedicated to St. Paul in London. 
By W. Longman, F.S.A. With 

numerous Illustrations. Square crown 
Svo. 2 1 s. 


WORKS published by LONGMANS 6- CO. 

The Art of Scientific The Application of Cast 

Discovery. By G. Gore, LL.D. 
F.R.S. Crown 8vo. 15-r. 

The Amateur Mechanics' 

Practical Handbook ; describing the 
different Tools required in the Work- 
shop. By A. H. G. Hobson. With 
33 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. 

The Engineer's Valuing 

Assistant. Bv H. D. IIoskold, 

Civil and Mining Engineer, 
price 3 ij-. 6d. 


Industrial Chemistry; a j 

Manual for Manufacturers and for Col- 
leges or Technical Schools ; a Transla- 
tion (by Dr. T. H. Barry) of Stoh- 
mann and Engler's German Edition of 
PAYEN's 'Precis deChimie Industrielle;' 
with Chapters on the Chemistry of the 
Metals, &c. byB. H. Paul, Ph.D. With 
69S Woodcuts. Medium 8vo. 42s. 

Gwilt's Encyclopaedia of 

Architecture, with above 1,600 Wood- 
cuts. Revised and extended by W. 
Papworth. 8yo. 52s. 6d. 

Lathes and Turning, Sim- 
pie, Mechanical, and Ornamental. By 
W. H. Northcott. Second Edition, 
with 338 Illustrations. 8vo. 18^. 

The Theory of Strains in 

Girders and similar Structures, with 
Observations on the application of 
Theory to Practice, and Tables of the 
Strength and other Properties of Ma- 
terials. By B. B. Stoney, M.A. 
M. Inst. C.E. Royal Svo. with 5 
Plates and 123 Woodcuts, 36s. 

A Treatise on Mills and 

Millwork. By the late Sir \V. Fair- 
BAIRN, Bart. C.E. Fourth Edition, 

with 18 Plates and 333 Woodcuts. 
1 vol. 8vo. 2$s. 

Useful Information for 

Engineers. By the late Sir W. 
FAIRBAIRN, Bart. C.E. With many 
Plates and Woodcuts. 3 vols, crown 
8vo. 3 1 s. 6d. 

and Wrought Iron to Building 
Purposes. By the late Sir W. Fair- 
bairn, Bart. C.E. With 6 Plates and 
118 Woodcuts. Svo. 16s. 

Hints on Household 

Taste in Furniture, Upholstery, 
and other Details. By C. L. East- 
lake. Fourth Edition, \\ h 100 Illus- 
trations. Square crown Svo. 14s. 

Handbook of Practical 

Telegraphy. By R. S. Culley, 
Memb. Inst. C.E. Seventh Edition. 
Plates & Woodcuts. Svo. i6.r. 

A Treatise on the Steam 

Engine, in its various applications to 
Mines, Mills, Steam Navigation, Rail- 
ways and Agriculture. By J. Bourne, 
C.E. With Portrait, 37 Plates, and 
546 Woodcuts. 4to. 42s. 

Recent Improvements in 

the Steam Engine. By J. Bourne, 
C.E. Fcp. Svo. Woodcuts, 6s. 

Catechism of the Steam 

Engine, in its various Applications. 
By John Bourne, C.E. Fcp. Svo. 
Woodcuts, 6s. 

Handbook of the Steam 

Engine, a Key to the Author's Cate- 
chism of the Steam Engine. By J. 
Bourne, C.E. Fcp. 8vo. Woodcuts, gs. 

Examples of Steam and 

Gas Engines of the most recent Ap- 
proved Types as employed in Mines, 
Factories, Steam Navigation, Railways 
and Agriculture, practically described. 
By John Bourne, C.E. With 54 
Plates and 356 Woodcuts. 4to. 70.?. 

Cresy's Encyclopaedia of 

Civil Engineering, Historical, Theo- 
retical, and Practical. With above 
3,000 Woodcuts. 8vo. 42s. 

Ure's Dictionary of Arts, 

Manufactures, and Mines. Seventh 
Edition, re- written and enlarged by R. 
Hunt, F.R.S. assisted by numerous 
contributors. With 2,604 Woodcuts. 
4 vols, medium 8vo. £j. Js. 

WORKS published by LONGMANS 



Practical Treatise on Me- 
tallurgy. Adapted from the last 
German Edition of Professor Kerl's 
Metallurgy by W. Crookes, F.R.S. 
&c. and E. Rohrig, Ph.D. 3 vols. 
8vo. with 625 Woodcuts. ^4. iox 

Anthracen ; its Constitution, 

Properties, Manufacture, and Deriva- 
tives, including Artificial Alizarin, An- 
thrapurpurin, &c. with their Applica- 
tions in Dyeing and Printing. By G. 
Auerbach. Translated by W. 
Crookes, F.R.S. 8vo. 12s. 

On Artificial Manures, 

their Chemical Selection and Scientific 
Application to Agriculture ; a Series 
of Lectures given at the Experimental 
Farm at Vincennes in 1867 and 1S74- 
75. By M. Georges Ville. Trans- 
lated and edited by W. Crookes, 
F.R.S. With 31 Plates. 8vo. 21s. 

Practical Handbook of 

Dyeing and Calico- Printing;. By 
W. Crookes, F.R.S. &c. With 

numerous Illustrations and specimens 
of Dyed Textile Fabrics. 8vo. 42X. 

The Art of Perfumery, 

and the Methods of Obtaining the 
Odours of Plants ; the Growth and 
general Flower Farm System of Rais- 
ing Fragrant Herbs; with Instructions 
for the Manufacture of Perfumes for 
the Handkerchief, Scented Powders, 
Odorous Vinegars and Salts, Snuff, 
Dentifrices, Cosmetics, Perfumed Soap, 
&c. By G. W. S. Piesse, Hi. I). 
F. C.S. Fourth Edition, with 96 Wood- 
cuts. Square crown 8vo. 21s. 

Mitchell's Manual of 

Practical Assaying. Fourth Edition, 
revised, with the Recent Discoveries 
incorporated, by W. Crookes, F.R.S. 
Crown 8vo. Woodcuts, 31J. 6d. 

Loudon's Encyclopaedia 

of Gardening ; the Theory and Prac- 
tice of Horticulture, Floriculture, Arbori- 
culture & Landscape Gardening. With 
1,000 Woodcuts. Svo. 2U. 

Loudon's Encyclopaedia 

of Agriculture ; the Laying-out, Im- 
provement, and Management of Landed 
Property ; the Cultivation and Economy 
of the Productions of Agriculture. With 
1,100 Woodcuts. Svo. 21 s. 


A Handbook to the Bible, 

or, Guide to the Study of the Holy 
Scriptures derived from Ancient Monu- 
ments and Modern Exploration. By 
F. R. Conder, and Lieut. C. R. 
Conder, R.E. late Commanding the 
Survey of Palestine. Second Edition ; 
Maps, Plates of Coins, &c. Post 8vo. 
price Js. 6d. 

Four Lectures on some 

Epochs of Early Church History. 
Py the Very Rev. C. MERIVALE, D.D. 
Dean of Ely. Crown 8vo. $s. 

A History of the Church 

of England ; Pre-Reformation Period. 
By the Rev. T. P. Boultbee, LL.D. 
8vo. 15.C 

Sketch of the History of 

the Church of England to the Revo- 
lution of 1688. By T. V. Short, 
D.D. Crown 8vo. fs. 6d. 

The English Church in 

the Eighteenth Century. By Charles 
J. Abbey, 'late Fellow of University 
College, Oxford; and John H. Over- 
ton, late Scholar of Lincoln College, 
Oxford. 2 vols. 8vo. $6s. 

An Exposition of the 39 

Articles, Historical and Doctrinal. By 
E. H. Browne, D.D. Bishop of Win- 
chester. Eleventh Edition. Svo. 16s. 

A Commentary on the 

39 Articles, forming an Introduction to 
the Theology of the Church of England. 
By the Rev. T. P. Boultbee, LL.D. 

New Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. 

Sermons preached most- 
ly in the Chapel of Rugby School 
by the late T. Arnold, D.D. Collective 
Edition, revised by the Author's 
Daughter, Mrs.W. E. Forster. 6 vols, 
crown Svo. 30^. or separately, 5-y. each. 


WORKS published by LONGMANS 6- CO. 

Historical Lectures on 

the Life of Our Lord Jesus Christ. 
By C. J. Ellicott, D.D. 8vo. 12s. 

The Eclipse of Faith ; or 

a Visit to a Religious Sceptic. By 
Henry Rogers. Fcp. Svo. 5*. 

Defence of the Eclipse of 

Faith. By H.Rogers. Fcp.8vo.3j. 6d. 

Nature, the Utility of 

Religion and Theism. Three Essays 
by John Stuart Mill. Svo. ios. 6d. 

A Critical and Gram- 
matical Commentary on St. Paul's 
Epistles. By C. J. Ellicott, D.D. 
8vo. Galatians, Ss. 6d. Ephesians, 
Ss. 6d. Pastoral Epistles, ios. 6d. 
Philippians, Colossians, & Philemon, 
10s. 6d. Thessalonians, >]s. 6d. 

Conybeare & Howson's 

Life and Epistles of St. Paul. 
Three Editions, copiously illustrated. 

Library Edition, with all the Original 
Illustrations, Maps, Landscapes on 
Steel, Woodcuts, &c. 2 vols. 4I0. 42J. 

Intermediate Edition, with a Selection 
of Maps, Plates, and Woodcuts. 2 vols, 
square crown Svo. 21s. 

Student's Edition, revised and con- 
densed, with 46 Illustrations and Maps. 
I vol. crown 8vo. ox 

The Jewish Messiah ; 

Critical History of the Messianic Idea 
among the Jews, from the Rise of the 
Maccabees to the Closing of the Talmud. 
By J. Drummond, B.A. 8vo. i$s. 

Bible Studies. By M. M. 

Kalisch, Ph.D. Part I. The Pro- 
phecies of Balaam. Svo. \os. 6d. 
Part II. The Book of Jonah. 8vo. 
price 1 os. 6d. 

Historical and Critical 

Commentary on the Old Testament ; 
with a New Translation. By M. M. 
Kalisch, Ph.D. Vol. I. Genesis, 
8vo. iSs. or adapted for the General 
Reader, 12s. Vol. II. Exodus, 15^. or 
adapted for the General Reader, 12s. 
Vol. III. Leviticus, Part I. 15^. or 
adapted for the General Reader, Ss. 
Vol. IV. Leviticus, Part II. 15. v. or 
adapted for the General Reader, Ss. 

Ewald's History of Israel. 

Translated from the German by J. E. 
Carpenter, M.A. with Preface by R. 
Martineau, M.A. 5 vols. 8vo. 635. 

Ewald's Antiquities of 

Israel. Translated from the German 
byH. S. Solly, M.A. Svo. 12s. 6d. 

The Types of Genesis, 

briefly considered as revealing the 
Development of Human Nature. By 
A. Jukes. Crown Svo. Js. 6d. 

The Second Death and 

the Restitution of all Things ; with 
some Preliminary Remarks on the 
Nature and Inspiration of Holy Scrip- 
ture. By A. Jukes. Crown Svo. p. 6d. 

The Gospel for the Nine- 
teenth Century. Third Edition. 
8vo. price 10s. 6d. 

Supernatural Religion ; 

an Inquiry into the Reality of Di- 
vine Revelation. Complete Edition, 
thoroughly revised. 3 vols. 8vo. 36^. 

Lectures on the Origin 

and Growth of Religion, as illus- 
trated by the Religions of India ; 
being the Hibbert Lectures, delivered 
at the Chapter House, Westminster 
Abbey, in iS 78, by F. Max Muller, 
M.A. Svo. ios. 6d. 

Introduction to the Sci- 
ence of Religion, Four Lectures de- 
livered at the Royal Institution ; with 
Essays on False Analogies and the 
Philosophy of Mythology. By F. MAX 
Muller, M.A. Crown Svo. 10s. 6d. 

The Four Gospels in 

Greek, with Greek-English Lexicon. 
By John T White, D.D. Oxon. 
Square 32mo. $s. 

Passing Thoughts on 

Religion. By MissSEWELL. Fcp. Svo. 
price 2 s - 6d. 

Thoughts for the Age. 

By Miss Sewell. Fcp. Svo. 3.?. 6d. 

Preparation for the Holy 

Communion ; the Devotions chiefly 
from the works of Jeremy Taylor. By 
Miss Sewell, 321110. 3.C 

WORKS published by LONGMANS &> CO. 


Bishop Jeremy Taylor's The Temporal Mission 

Entire Works; with Life by Bishop of the Holy Ghost; or. Reason and 

Heber. Revised and corrected by the ' Revelation. By Henry EDWARD 

Rev. C. P. Eden. 10 vols. £$. $s. Manning, D.D. Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d. 

Hymns of Praise and 

Prayer. Corrected and edited by 
Rev. John Martineau, LL.D. 
Crown Svo. 45. 6d. 32mo. is. 6d. 

Spiritual Songs for the 

Sundays and Holidays throughout 
the Year. By J. S. B. Monsell, 
LL.D. Fcp. Svo. $s. iSmo. 2s. 

Christ the Consoler; a 

Book of Comfort for the Sick. By 
Ellice Hopkins. Second Edition. 
Fcp. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 

Lyra Germanica ; Hymns 

translated from the German by Miss C. 
Wink worth. Fcp. Svo. $s. 

Hours of Thought on 

Sacred Things ; Two Volumes of Ser- 
mons. By James Martineau, D.D. 
LL.D. 2 vols, crown Svo. 'js. 6d. each. 

Endeavours after the 

Christian Life ; Discourses. By 
James Martineau, D.D. LL.D. 
Fifth Edition. Crown Svo. Js. 6d. 

The Pentateuch & Book 

of Joshua Critically Examined. 
By J. W. Colenso, D.D. Bishop of 
Natal. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

Lectures on the Penta- 
teuch and the Moabite Stone ; with 
Appendices. By J. W. Colenso, 
D.D. Bishop of Natal. Svo. 12s. 


Sunshine and Storm in 

the East, or Cruises to Cyprus and Con- 
stantinople. By Mrs. Brassey. With 
2 Maps and 1 14 Illustrations engraved 
on Wood by G. Pearson, chiefly from 
Drawings by the Hon. A. Y. Bingham; 
the Cover from an Original Design by 
Gustave Dore. Svo. 21s. 

A Voyage in the l Sun- 
beam/ our Home on the Ocean for 
Eleven Months. By Mrs. Brassey. 
Cheaper Edition, with Map and 65 
Wood Engravings. Crown Svo. Js. 6d. 

One Thousand Miles up 

the Nile ; a Journey through Egypt 
and Nubia to the Second Cataract. 
By Miss Amelia B. Edwards, Author 
of 'Untrodden Peaks and Unfrequented 
Valleys,' 'Barbara's History,' &c. With 
Facsimiles of Inscriptions, Ground 
Plans, Two Coloured Maps of the Nile 
from Alexandria to Dongola, and 80 
Illustrations engraved on Wood from 
Drawings by the Author ; bound in 
ornamental covers designed also by the 
Author. Imperial 8vo. 42^. 

Wintering in the Ri- 

viera ; with Notes of Travel in Italy 
and France, and Practical Hints to 
Travellers. By William Miller, 
S.S.C. Edinburgh. With 12 Illus- 
trations. Post Svo. 12s. 6d. 

San Remo and the Wes- 
tern Riviera ; comprising Bordighera, 
Mentone, Monaco, Beaulieu, Ville- 
franche, Nice, Cannes, Porto Maurizio, 
Marina, Alassio, Yerezzi, Noli, Monte 
Grosso, Pegli, Cornigliano, Genoa, and 
other Towns — climatically and medi 
cally considered. By A. Hill Hassall, 
M.D. Map and Woodcuts. Crown 
Svo. 10s. 6d. 

Eight Years in Ceylon. 

By Sir Samuel W. Baker, M.A. 
Crown Svo. Woodcuts, 7.5-. 6d. 

The Rifle and the Hound 

in Ceylon. By Sir Sam uel W. Baker, 
M.A. Crown Svo. Woodcuts, Js. 6d. 


WORKS published by LONGMANS 6- CO. 

Himalayan and Sub- 

Himalayan Districts 


India, their Climate, .Medical Topo- 
graphy, and 1 )isease Distribution ; with 
reasons for assigning a Malarious Origin 
to Goitre and some other Diseases. By 
1 . \. MACNAMARA, M.D. F.R.G.S. 
Surgeon-Major (retired) Indian Medical 
Service, late Professor of Chemistry, 
Calcutta Medical College, and Medical 
Inspector of Inland Labour Transport, 
Calcutta. Svo. [In the press. 

The Alpine Club Map of 

Switzerland, with parts of the Neigh- 
bouring Countries, on the scale of Four 
Miles to an Inch. Edited by R. C. 
Nichols, F.R.G.S. 4 Sheets in 
Portfolio, 42J-. coloured, or 345. un- 

The Alpine Guide. By 

John Ball, M.R.I. A. Post Svo. with 

Maps and other Illustrations : — 

The Eastern Alps, \os. 6rf. 
Central Alps, including all 

the Oberland District, 'js. 6d. 

Western Alps, including 

Mont Blanc, Monte Rosa, Zcrmatt, &c. 
Price 6.y. 6d. 

On Alpine Travelling and 

the Geology of the Alps. Price is. 
Either of the Three Volumes or Parts of 
the 'Alpine Guide' may be had with 
this Introduction prefixed, is. extra. 


Novels and Tales. By the 

Right Hon. the Earl of Beacons- 
tield, K.G. Cabinet Editions, complete 
in Ten Volumes, crown Svo. 6s. each. 

Lothair, 6s. Venetia, 6s. 

Coningsby, 6s. Alroy, Ixion, &c. 6s. 

Sybil, 6s. Young Duke &c. 6s. 

Tancred, 6s. Vivian Grey, 6s. 

Henrietta Temple, 6s. 

Contarini Fleming, &c. 6s. 

Tales from Euripides ; 

Iphigenia, Alcestis, Hecuba, Helen, 
Medea. Py Vincent K. CoorER, 
M.A. late Scholar of Brasenose College, 
Oxford. Fcp. Svo. 3* 6d. 

Whispers from Fairy- 
land. By the Right Hon. E. II. 
Knatchbull-Hugessen, M.P. With 
9 Illustrations. Crown Svo. 2 s - 6d. 

Higgledy-Piggledy ; or, 

Stories for Everybody and Every- 
body's Children. By the Right Hon. 
E. H, Knatchbull-Htj[GESsen, M.P. 

With 9 Illustrations. Cr. 8vo. 2> s - &/. 

Stories and Tales. By 

Elizabeth M. Sewell. Cabinet 
Edition, in Ten Volumes, each contain- 
ing a complete Tale or Story :— 

Amy Herbert, 2s. 6d. Gertrude, 2s. 6d. 
The Earl's Daughter, 2s. 6d. The 
Experience of Life, 2s. 6d. Cleve 
Hall, 2s. 6d. Ivors, 2's. 6d. Katharine 
Ashton, 2s. 6d. Margaret Percival, 
3>. 6d. Laneton Parsonage, 3^. 6d. 
Ursula, as. 6d. 

The Modern Novelist's 

Library. Each work complete in itself, 
price 2s. boards, or 2s. 6d. cloth : — 

By Lord Beaconsf 

Henrietta Temple. 
Contarini Fleming. 
Alroy, Ixion, &c. 
The Young Duke, &c. 
Vivian Grey. 

By Anthony Trollope. 
Barchester Towers. 
The Warden. 

WORKS published by LONGMANS 6- CO. 




Digby Grand. 
General Bounce. 
Kate Coventry. 
The Gladiators. 

Good for Nothing-. 
Holmby House. 
The Interpreter. 
Queen's Maries. 

By the Author of ' The Rose Garden. 

By the Author of « Mile. Mori.' 
The Atelier du Lys. 
Mademoiselle Mori. 

15)' Various Writers. 

Atherstone Priory. 

The Burgomaster's Family. 

Elsa and her Vulture. 

The Six Sisters of the Valleys. 

The Novels and Tales of the Right Honourable 

the Earl of Beaconsfield, K.G. Complete in Ten Volumes, crown 8vo. cloth 
extra, gilt edges, 30J. 


Lays of Ancient Rome; 

with Ivry and the Armada. By Lord 
Macaulay. 161110. T>s. 6d. 

Horatii Opera. Library 

Edition, with English Notes, Marginal 
References & various Readings. Edited 
by Rev. J. E. Yonge, M.A. 8vo. 21 j. 

Poetical Works of Jean 

Ingelow. New Edition, reprinted, 
with Additional Matter, from the 23rd 
and 6th Editions of the two volumes 
respectively ; with 2 Vignettes. 2 vols, 
fcp. 8vo. 12s. 

Poems by Jean Ingelow. 

EirstSeries, with nearly 100 Woodcut 
Illustrations. Fcp. 4to. 21 s. 

The Poem of the Cid : a 

Translation from the Spanish, with 
Introduction and Notes. By JOHN 
OrmsBY. Crown Svo. 5.9. 

Festus, a Poem. By 

Philip James Bailey. 10th Edition, 
enlarged & revised. Crown Svo. 12s. 6rt. 

The Iliad of Homer, Ho- 

mometrically translated by C. 1>. 
CAYLEY. 8vo. I2J. 6c/. 

The JEneid of Virgil. 

Translated into English Verse. By J. 
CONINGTON, M.A. Crown Svo. gs. 

Bowdler's Family Shak- 

speare. Genuine Edition, in I vol. 
medium Svo. large type, with 36 Wood- 
cuts, 14J. or in 6 vols. fcp. Svo. 2Ls\ 

Southey's Poetical 

Works, with the Author's last Cor- 
rections and Additions. Medium Svo. 
with Portrait. 14.C. 


Annals of the Road ; or, 

Notes on Mail and Stage-Coaching in 
Creat Britain. By Captain Malet. 
With 3 Woodcuts and 10 Coloured 
Illustrations. Medium Svo. 21 r. 

DOWn the Road ; Or, Re- 
miniscences of a Gentleman Coachman. 
By C. T. s. Birch Reynardson. 
Second Edition, with 12 Coloured 
Illustrations. Medium Svo. 2 i.e. 


WORKS published by LONGMANS & CO. 

Blaine's Encyclopaedia of 

Rural Sports; Complete Accounts, 
Historical, Practical, and Descriptive, 
of Hunting, Shooting, Fishing, Racing, 
&c. With 600 Woodcuts. 8vo. 21s. 

A Book on Angling ; or, 

Treatise on the Art of Fishing in every 
branch ; including full Illustrated Lists 
of Salmon Flies. By Francis Francis. 
Post 8vo. Portrait and Plates, 15s. 

Wilcocks's Sea- Fisher- 
man : comprising the Chief Methods 
of Hook and Line Fishing, a glance at 
Nets, and remarks on Boats and Boat- 
ing. Post Svo. Woodcuts, 12s. 6d. 

The Fly-Fisher's Ento- 
mology. By Alfred Ronalds. 
With 20 Coloured Plates. Svo. 145-. 

Horses and Riding. 

George Nevile, M. A. With _ 
trations. Crown Svo. 6s. 

Youatt on the Horse. 

Revised and enlarged by W. Watson, 
M.R.C.V.S. Svo. Woodcuts, 12s. 6d. 

Youatt's Work on the 

Dog - . Revised and enlarged. Svo. 
Woodcuts, 6s. 


The Dog in Health and 

Disease. By Stonehenge. Third 
Edition, with 78 Wood Engravings. 
Square crown 8vo. Js. 6d. 

The Greyhound. By 

Stonehenge. Revised Edition, with 
25 Portraits of Greyhounds, &c. 
Square crown Svo. 15^. 

Stables and Stable Fit- 
tings. By W. Milks. Imp. Svo. 
with 13 Plates, 15 s, 

The Horse's Foot, and 

How to keep it Sound. By W. 

Miles. Imp. Svo. Woodcuts, 12s. 6d. 

A Plain Treatise on 

Horse-shoeing. By W. Miles. Post 

Svo. Woodcuts, 2s. 6d. 

Remarks on Horses' 

Teeth, addressed to Purchasers. By 
W. Miles. Post Svo. u. 6d. 

The Ox, his Diseases and 

their Treatment ; with an Essay on 
Parturition in the Cow. By J. R. 
Dobson, M.R.C.V.S. Crown Svo. 
Illustrations, "js. 6d. 


Maunder's Treasury of 

Knowledge and Library of Refer- 
ence ; comprising an English Diction- 
ary and Grammar, Universal Gazetteer, 
Classical Dictionary, Chronology, Raw 
Dictionary, Synopsis of the Peerage, 
Useful Tables, &c. Fcp. Svo. 6s. 

Maunder's Biographical 

Treasury. Latest Edition, recon- 
structed and partly re-written, with 
above 1,600 additional Memoirs, by 
W. L. R. Cates. Ecp. Svo. 6s. 

Maunder's Treasury of 

Natural History ; or, Popular Dic- 
tionary of Zoology. Revised and 
corrected Edition. Ecp. Svo. with 
900 ^VVoodcuts, 6 c, 

Maunder's Scientific and 

Literary Treasury; a Popular En- 
cyclopaedia of Science, Literature, and 
Art. Latest Edition, partly re-written, 
with above 1,000 New Articles, by J. 
Y. Johnson. Ecp. Svo. 6s. 

Maunder's Treasury of 

Geography, Physical, Historical, 
Descriptive, and Political. Edited by 
W. Hughes, E. R. G. S. With 7 iMaps 
and 16 Plates. Fcp. Svo. 6s. 

Maunder's Historical 

Treasury; Introductory Outlines of 
Universal History, and Separate His- 
tories of all Nations. Revised by the 
Rev. Sir G. W. Cox, P>art. M.A. 
Fcp. 8vo. 6s. 

WORKS published by LONGMANS 6- CO. 


The Treasury of Botany, 

or Popular Dictionary of the Vegetable 
Kingdom ; with which is incorporated 
a Glossary of Botanical Terms. Edited 
by J. Lindley, F.R.S. and T. Moore, 
F.L.S. With 274 Woodcuts and 20 
Steel Plates. Two Parts, fcp. 8vo. 12s. 

The Treasury of Bible 

Knowledge ; being a Dictionary of 
the Books, Persons, Places, Events, 
and other Matters of which mention is 
made in Holy Scripture. By the Rev. 
J. *Ayre, M. A. Maps, Plates & Wood- 
cuts. Fcp. Svo. 6s. 

A Practical Treatise on 

Brewing ; with Formulae for Public 
Brewers & Instructions for Private Fam- 
ilies. By W. Black. 8vo. ioj. 6d. 

The Theory of the Mo- 
dem Scientific Game of Whist. 
By W.Pole, F.R.S. Tenth Edition. 
Fcp. Svo. 2s. 6d. 

The Correct Card ; or, 

How to Play at Whist ; a Whist 
Catechism. By Major A. Campbell- 
Walker, F.R.G.S. Latest Edition. 
Fcp. 8vo. 2.S. 6d. 

The Cabinet Lawyer; a 

Popular Digest of the Laws of England, I 
Civil, Criminal, and Constitutional. 
Twenty-Fifth Edition, corrected and 
extended. Fcp. 8vo. gs. 

Chess Openings. ByF.W. 

Longman, Balliol College, Oxford. 
New Edition. Fcp. Svo. 2s. 6d. 

Pewtner's Compre- 
hensive Specifier; a Guide to the 
Practical Specification of every kind of 
Building-Artificer's Work. Edited by 
W. Young. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

Modern Cookery for Pri- 
vate Families, reduced to a System 
of Easy Practice in a Series of carefully- 
tested Receipts. By Eliza Acton. 
With 8 Plates and 150 Woodcuts. Fcp. 
§vo ? 6>> 

Food and Home Cookery. 

A Course of Instruction in Practical 
Cookery and Cleaning, for Children in 
Elementary Schools. By Mrs. BUCK- 
TON. Woodcuts. Crown Svo. 2s. 

Hints to Mothers on the 

Management of their Health during 
the Period of Pregnancy and in the 
Lying-in Room. By Thomas Bull, 
M.D. Fcp. Svo. 2s. 6d. 

The Maternal Manage- 
ment of Children in Health and 
Disease. By Thomas Bull, M.D. 
Fcp. Svo. 2s. 6d. 

The Farm Valuer. By 

John Scott, Land Valuer. Crown 
Svo. 5,. 

Rents and Purchases ; or, 

the Valuation of Landed Property,, 
Woods, Minerals, Buildings, &c. By 
John Scott. Crown Svo. 6s. 

Economic Studies. By 

the late Walter Bagehot, M.A. 
Fellow of University College, London. 
Edited by Richard PIolt Hutton. 
Svo. 10s. 6d. 

Economics for Beginners 

By H. D. MACLEOD, M.A. Small 
crown Svo. 2s. 6d. 

The Elements of Bank- 
ing. By H. D. Macleod, M.A. 
Fourth Edition. Crown Svo. $s. 

The Theory and Practice 

of Banking-. By II. 1>. Macleod, 

M.A. 2 vols. Svo. 26s. 

The Resources of Mod- 
em Countries ; Essays towards an 
Estimate of the Economic Position of 

Nations and British Trade Prospects. 
By Alex. Wilson. 2 vols. Svo. 24s. 

The Patentee's Manual ; 

a Treatise on the Law and Practice of 
Letters Patent, for the use of Patentees 
and Inventors. By J. JOHNSON, Bar- 
rister-at-Law ; and J. II. Johnson, 
Assoc. Inst. C.E. Solicitor and Patent 
Agent, Lincoln's Inn Fields and Glas- 
gow. Fourth Edition, enlarged. Svo, 
price I or. 6d, 


Abbey & Overton s English Church History 15 

's Photography 11 

Acton ' s Modern Cookery 21 

Alpine Club Map of Switzerland 18 

Alpine Guide (The) 18 

Amos' s jurisprudence 5 

Primer of the Constitution 5 

Fifty Years of the English Con- 
stitution 5 

Anderson s Strength of Materials 11 

A rmstrong's Organic Chemistry 11 

Arnold's (Dr. ) Lectures on Modern History 2 

Miscellaneous Works 7 

Sermons 15 

(T. ) English Literature 6 

Arnott's Elements of Physics 10 

Atelier (The) du Lys 19 

Atherstone Priory 19 

\utumn Holidays of a Country Parson ... 7 

Ayre's Treasury of Bible Knowledge 21 

Bacon's Essays, by Whately 6 

Life and Letters, by Spedding ... 5 

Works 5 

Bagehot's Economic Studies 21 

Literary Studies 6 

Bailey's Festus, a Poem 19 

Bain's Mental and Moral Science 6 

on the Senses and Intellect 6 

Emotions and Will 6 

Baker's Two Works on Ceylon 17 

Ball's Alpine Guides 18 

Barry on Railway Appliances 11 

Beaconsfield' s (Lord) Novels and Tales 18 & 19 

Becker s Charicles and Gallus 8 

Beesly's Gracchi, Marius, and Sulla 3 

Black ' s Treatise on Brewing 21 

Blackley's German- English Dictionary 8 

Blaine's Rural Sports 20 

Bloxam's Metals 11 

Bolland and Lang's Aristotle's Politics 6 

Boultbee on 39 Articles 15 

's History of the English Church... 15 

Bourne's Works on the Steam Engine 14 

Bowdler's Family Shakespeare 19 

B ram ley-Moo re s Six Sisters of the Valleys . 19 
Bra?ide's Dictionary of Science, Literature, 

and Art 12 

Brassey's Sunshine and Storm in the East . 17 

Voyage of the Sunbeam 17 

Browne's Exposition of the 39 Articles 15 

Browning's Modern England 3 

Buckle's History of Civilisation 2 

Posthumous Remains 7 

Buck ton's Food and Home Cookery 21 

Health in the House 13 

Town and Window Gardening... 12 

Bull's Hints to Mothers 2r 

Maternal Management of Children . 21 

Burgomaster's Family (The) 19 

Burke's Vicissitudes of Families 4 

Cabinet Lawyer 21 

Capes' s Age of the Antonines 3 

Early Roman Empire 3 

Cayley's Iliad of Homer 19 

Cctshwayd's Dutchman, translated by 

Bishop Colcnso 7 

Changed Aspects of Unchanged Truths ... 7 

Chesney ' s Indian Polity , 2 

Waterloo Campaign 2 

Church's Beginning of the Middle Ages ... 3 

Colenso on Moabite Stone &c 17 

's Pentateuch and Book of Joshua. 17 

Commonplace Philosopher 7 

Comte's Positive Polity 5 

Conder's Handbook to the Bible 15 

Congreve's Politics of Aristotle 6 

Conington's Translation of Virgil's /Eneid 19 

Miscellaneous Writings 6 

Cojitanseaii s Two French Dictionaries ... 8 

Conybeare and Howson's St. Paul 16 

Cooper's Tales from Euripides 18 

Cordcry's Struggle against Absolute Mon- 
archy 3 

Cotia on Rocks, by Lawrence 12 

Counsel and Comfort from a City Pulpit... 7 

Cox's (G. W.) Athenian Empire 3 

■ Crusades 3 

* Greeks and Persians 3 

Creighton's Age of Elizabeth 3 

England a Continental Power 3 

Shilling History of England ... 3 

Tudors and the Reformation 3 

Cresy's Encyclopaedia of Civil Engineering 14 

Critical Essays of a Country Parson 7 

Crookes's Anthracen 15 

Chemical Analyses 13 

Dyeing and Calico-printing 15 

Culley's Handbook of Telegraphy 14 

Curteis's Macedonian Empire 3 

De Caisne and Le Maout's Botany 12 

De Tocquevi lie's Democracy in America... 5 

Dixon's Rural Bird Life 12 

Dobson on the Ox 20 

Dove's Law of Storms 9 

Doyle's (R.) Fairyland 13 

Drummo7id' s Jewish Messiah 16 

Eastlake's Hints on Household Taste 14 

Edwards's Nile 17 

Ellicott' s Scripture Commentaries 16 

Lectures on Life of Christ 16 

Elsa and her Vulture 19 

Epochs of Ancient History 3 

English History 3 

Modern Flistory 3 

EwaloVs Flistory of Israel 16 

Antiquities of Israel 16 

Fairbairn's Applications of Iron 14 

Information for Engineers 14 

Mills and Millwork 14 

Farrar's Language and Languages 7 

Francis s Fishing Book 20 

Frobisher's Life by Jones 4 

Froude's Caesar 4 

English in Ireland 1 

History of England 1 

Lectures on South Africa 7 

Short Studies 6 

Gairdncr's Houses of Lancaster and York 3 

Richard III. & Perkin Warbeck 2 

Ganot's Elementary Physics to 

Natural Philosophy 10 

Gardiner's Buckingham and Charles 2 

WORKS published by LONGMANS & CO. 


Gardiner's I 'crsonal Government of Charles I. 2 

First Two Stuarts 3 

Thirty Years' War 3 

German Home Life 7 

Goodeve's Mechanics i* 

Mechanism n 

Gore's Art of Scientific Discovery 14 

Electro-Metallurgy 11 

Gospel (The) for the Nineteenth Century . 16 

Grant's Ethics of Aristotle 6 

Graver Thoughts of a Country Parson 7 

Grev/ He's Journal 1 

Griffin s Algebra and Trigonometry 11 

Griffiths A B C of Philosophy 5 

Grove on Correlation of Physical Forces... 10 

Gwill's Encyclopaedia of Architecture 14 

Hale's Fall of the Stuarts 3 

Hartwig's Works on Natural History and 

Popular Science 11 

HassalVs Climate of San Remo 17 

Houghton's Animal Mechanics 10 

Hayward's Selected Essays 6 

Heer's Primeval World of Switzerland 12 

Heine's Life and Works, by Stigand 4 

Helmholtz on Tone 10 

Helmholtz s Scientific Lectures 10 

Herschcl's Outlines of Astronomy 9 

Hillebrand's Lectures on German Thought 6 

Hobsons Amateur Mechanic 14 

Hopkin s's Christ the Consoler 17 

Hoskold's Engineer's Valuing Assistant ... 14 

Hullah's History _ of Modern Music 12 

Transition Period 12 

Hume'sEssays 6 

Treatise on Human Nature 6 

Ihne's Rome to its Capture by the Gauls... 3 

History of Rome 3 

Ingelow's Poems 19 

Jamesons Sacred and Legendary Art 13 

Memoirs by Macpherson 4 

Jenkins Electricity and Magnetism 11 

Jerrold's Life of Napoleon 1 

Johnson's Normans in Europe 3 

Patentee's Manual 21 

Johnston s Geographical Dictionary 8 

Jukes' s Types of Genesis 16 

Jukes on Second Death 16 

Kalisch's Bible Studies 16 

Commentary on the Bible 16 

Path and Goal 5 

Keller's Lake Dwellings of Switzerland.... 12 

Kerfs Metallurgy, by Crookes and R'6hrig % 15 

Kingzctt's Alkali Trade 13 

Animal Chemistry 13 

Kirby and Spence's Entomology 12 

Klein's Pastor's Narrative 7 

Knatchbull-Hug'essen 's Fairy-Land 18 

Higgledy-Piggledy 18 

Landscapes, Churches, &c 7 

Latham s English Dictionaries 8 

Handbook of English Language 8 

Lecky's History of England 1 

European Morals 3 

■ Rationalism 3 

■ Leaders of Public Opinion 4 

Leisure Hours in Town 7 

Leslie's Essays in Political and Moral 

Philosophy 6 

Lessons of Middle Age 7 

Lewes' s Biographical History of Philosophy 3 

Lewis on Authority 6 

Liddclland Seolt's Greek-English Lexicons 8 

Lindley and Moore's Treasury of Botany ... 21 

Lloyd's Magnetism 10 

Wave-Theory of Light 10 

Longman's (F. W. ) Chess Openings 21 

■ German Dictionary ... 8 

— ■ (W.) Edward the Third 2 

Lectures on History of England 2 

Old and New St. Paul's 13 

Loudon's Encyclopaedia of Agriculture ... 15 

— — — Gardening 15 

■■ Plants 12 

Lubbock's Origin of Civilisation 12 

Ludlow ' s American War of Independence 3 

Lyra Germanica 17 

Macalister s Vertebrate Animals 11 

Macaulay s (Lord) Essays 1 

History of England ... 1 

Lays, Illustrated 13 

Cheap Edition... 19 

Life and Letters 4 

Miscellaneous Writings 7 

Speeches 7 

Works 1 

Writings, Selections from 7 

McCullocJi s Dictionary of Commerce 8 

Macfarren on Musical Harmony 13 

Macleod's Economical Philosophy 5 

Economics for Beginners 21 

Theory and Practice of Banking 21 

Elements of Banking 21 

Macnamara's Himalayan Districts of British 

India 18 

Mademoiselle Mori 19 

Mahaffy s Classical Greek Literature 3 

Ma let's Annals of the Road 19 

Manning's Mission of the Holy Spirit 17 

Marshman s Life of Havelock 4 

Martincaus Christian Life 17 

Hours of Thought 17 

Hymns 17 

Maunder s Popular Treasuries 20 

Maxwells Theory of Heat 11 

May's History of Democracy 2 

Histoiy of England 2 

Melville's (Whytc) Novels and Tales 19 

Mendelssohn s Letters 4 

Merivales Early Church History 15 

Fall of the Roman Republic ... 2 

General History of Rome 2 

Roman Triumvirates 3 

Romans under the Empire 2 

Merrifclds Arithmetic and Mensuration... 11 

Miles on Horse's Foot and Horse Shoeing 20 

on Horse's Teeth and Stables 20 

Mill (J.) on the Mind 5 

Milts (J. S.) Autobiography 4 

Dissertations & Discussions 5 

Essays on Religion 16 

I familton's Philosophy 5 

Liberty 5 

Political Economy 5 

— Representative Government 5 

Subjection of Women 5 

System of Logic 5 

Unsettled Questions 5 

Utilitarianism 5 

24 WORKS published by LONGMANS & CO. 

Millers Elements of Chemistry 13 

Inorganic Chemistry 11 

Wintering in the Riviera 17 

Minto (Lord) in India 2 

Mitchell's Manual of Assaying 15 

Modern Novelist's Library 18 & 19 

MonselTs Spiritual Songs 17 

Moore's Irish Melodies, Illustrated Edition 13 

Lalla Rookh, Illustrated Edition.. 13 

MorelTs Philosophical Fragments 5 

Morris s Age of Anne 3 

Mozart's Life, by Nohl 4 

Miillcrs Chips from a German Workshop. 7 

Hibbert Lectures on Religion ... 16 

Science of Language 7 

. Science of Religion 16 

Nelson on the Moon 9 

Nev lie's Horses and Riding 20 

Newman's Apologia pro Vita Sua 4 

Nicols's Puzzle of Life 12 

Noiri's Mtiller & Philosophy of Language 7 

Northcott's Lathes & Turning 14 

Ormsbys Poem of the Cid 19 

Owen's Comparative Anatomy and Phy- 
siology of Vertebrate Animals 11 

Packe s Guide to the Pyrenees 18 

Pattlsons Casaubon 4 

Payen's Industrial Chemistry 14 

Pewtner's Comprehensive Specifier 21 

Ph illips s Civil War in Wales 2 

Plessc's Art of Perfumery 15 

Pole's Game of Whist 21 

Powell's Early England 3 

Preece & Sivcwright's Telegraphy 11 

Present-Day Thoughts 7 

Proctor's Astronomical Works 9 

Scientific Essays (Two Series) ... 11 

Prothero's Life of Simon tie Montfort 4 

Public Schools Atlases 8 

Rawllnson's Parthia 3 

— Sassanians 3 

Recreations'of a Country Parson 7 

Rcynardsori s Down the Road 19 

Pick's Dictionary of Antiquities 8 

Piters' s Orchard House 12 

Rose Amateur's Guide 12 

Rogers's Eclipse of Faith 16 

- Defence of Eclipse of Faith 16 

Roget's English Thesaurus 8 

Ronalds Fly-Fisher's Entomology 20 

Rowley's Rise of the People 3 

Settlement of the Constitution ... 3 

Russia and England 1 

Russia Before and After the War 1 

Ridley's Study of Rocks 11 

Sandars's Justinian's Institutes 6 

Sankey s Sparta and Thebes 3 

Savile on Apparitions 7 

Schellen's Spectrum Analysis 9 

Seaside Musings 7 

Scott's Farm Valuer 21 

Rents and Purchases 21 

Seebohm's Oxford Reformers of 1498 2 

Protestant Revolution 3 

Sewell's History of France 2 

Sewell's Passing Thoughts on Religion ... 1 

Preparation for Communion 1 

Stories and Tales 1 

Thoughts for the Age 1 

Shelley's Workshop Appliances 1 

Short's Church History 1 

Smith's (Sydney) Wit and Wisdom 

(Dr. R. A.) Air and Rain 

(R. B.) Carthage & the Carthaginians 

Southey's Poetical Works 1 

Stanley's History of British Birds 1 

Stephen's Ecclesiastical Biography 

Stonehenge, Dog and Greyhound — 2 

Stoney on Strains 1 

Stubbs's Early Plantagenets 

Sunday Afternoons, by A. K. H.B 

Supernatural Religion 1 

Swlnbournes Picture Logic 

Tancock's England during the Wars, 


Taylor's History of India 

Ancient and Modern History ... 

[Jeremy] Works, edited by Eden 1 

Text-Books of Science 1 

Thome's Botany 1 

Thomson's Laws of Thought ;.... 

Thorpes Quantitative Analysis 1 

Thorpe and Muir's Qualitative Analysis ... 1 
Thndichum s Annals of Chemical Medicine 1 

Tllden's Chemical Philosophy 1 

Practical Chemistry 1 

Todd on Parliamentary Government 

Trench's Realities of Irish Life 

Trollope's Warden and Barchester Towers 1 

Twlss's Law of Nations 

Tyndall's (Professor) Scientific Works ... 1 

Unawares 1 

Unwin's Machine Design 1 

Ure's Arts, Manufactures, and Mines 1 

Venn's Life, by Knight 

Ville on Artificial Manures 1 

Walker on Whist 2 

Walpole s History of England 

Warburton's Edward the Third 

Watson's Geometery i 

Watts' s Dictionary of Chemistry 1 

Webb's Civil War in Herefordshire 

Weinkold's Experimental Physics 1 

Wellington's Life, by Gleig 

Wkately's English Synonymes 



White's Four Gospels in Greek ] 

and Riddle's Latin Dictionaries ... 

Wilcocks ' s Sea-Fisherman s 

Williams's Aristotle's Ethics 

Wilson's Resources of Modern Countries... s 
Wood's (J. G.) Popular Works on Natural 

History ] 

Woodioard's Geology I 

Yonge's English-Greek Lexicons 

Horace ] 

Youatt on the Dog 2 

on the Horse 2 

Zcllcr s Greek Philosophy 

S/ottiszvoodc & Co. Printers, Nwo-sireet Square, London, 

Date Due 


IN U. S. A.